ArticleMedical molecular morphology2025
Effects of platelet-rich plasma, platelet-rich fibrin and concentrated growth factor on flap survival: a study in a rat dorsal cross-region perforator flap model.
Article in Medical molecular morphology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
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
backgroundWith the extensive application of flap surgery in clinical practice, it has been a matter of great concern to improve the survival rate of flap surgery for a long time. This study compared and explored the effect of the three generations of platelet concentrates (PCs), including platelet-rich plasma (PRP), platelet-rich fibrin (PRF), and concentrated growth factor (CGF), on flap survival.
methodsAfter PRP, PRF, and CGF gels were observed by scanning electron microscope (SEM), their vascularizing effect were assessed by infrared thermal imager, flap survival experiment, arterial perfusion angiography, and immunohistochemical staining in a rat dorsal cross-region perforator flap model.
resultsThe fibrin of PRP gel showed irregular clumps and loose structure, while that of PRF and CGF gels formed 3D network structure with orderly arrangement and compact structure. In animal models, the use of all the three PCs can increase the number of vessels and the amount of blood perfusion in choke zones (all P < 0.05), thus improving the flap survival rate. Moreover, the effects of CGF and PRF were obviously better than those of PRP (all P < 0.05), but there was no significant difference between CGF and PRF (P > 0.05).
conclusionsPRP, PRF, and CGF all have a good effect on promoting vascularization, and can significantly improve the survival rate of dorsal cross-region perforator flap in rat model. Besides, PRF and CGF have greater potential in promoting vascularization than PRP.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40237837What 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.