ReviewCureus2024
The History and Current Status of Platelet-Rich Plasma Therapy in Dermatology.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Efficacy and Safety of Combined Platelet-Rich Plasma With Fractional Laser for Adult Patients With Vitiligo: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of single-spin to double-spin platelet-rich plasma centrifugation methods in the treatment of androgenic alopecia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Water Deficit and Methyl Jasmonate Enhance the Antiplatelet Potential of Blueberries Through Changes in Selected Phenolic Compounds.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Platelet-like cells differentiated from adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells inhibit acute inflammation of tendinopathy in rats.Journal of bone and mineral metabolism · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since the 1800s, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has been used as a treatment for a wide range of medical conditions with a concomitant effect of tending to reduce the need for some invasive procedures. The aim of this narrative review was to concisely document the history and current usage of PRP specifically in the field of dermatology. Four databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, CINAHL, and Web of Science) were searched for primary articles written in English that evaluated human subjects and focused on PRP use in dermatology. Initial search terms included "platelet rich plasma," "alopecia," "androgenic alopecia," "dermatology," "PDGF," "aging," "skin rejuvenation," "diabetic ulcers," "venous leg ulcers," "acne," "acne scars," "scars," "hyperpigmentation," "melasma," "hypopigmentation," "vitiligo," and "PRP." After review, articles were excluded if they were commentaries, editorials, animal studies, review articles, or were unrelated to dermatology. The bibliography of retrieved articles was also searched for relevant articles. The present review results describe the function of PRP from its first usage for thrombocytopenia to its usage for melasma. In this time frame, its use in dermatology has gone through many evolutions from using its healing factors for treating wounds to using it as the treatment for wrinkles, hair loss, scars, ulcers, and skin pigmentation disorders. Its anti-inflammatory and growth factors have been shown to initiate a healing cascade that promotes the growth and regeneration of tissues. It is hoped that this review will help educate patients and physicians about the efficacy of PRP therapy and thereby help avoid unnecessary invasive procedures for certain conditions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.