ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Comparison of topical estrogen and platelet-rich plasma injections in the treatment of postmenopausal vaginal atrophy.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sexual Quality of Life in Postmenopausal Women: A Comparative Randomized Controlled Trial of Intravaginal PRP Therapy Versus Local Hormonal Treatments.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Trial
- Microneedling-assisted Panax ginseng exosome protocol for vulvovaginal symptoms and vulvar skin tone changes: A preliminary pilot observational study.Women's health (London, England)Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is considered safe and is a low-cost, simple, natural, and minimally invasive method for vaginal rejuvenation. We aimed to compare the effects of hormonal treatment options and PRP use for postmenopausal vulvovaginal atrophy (VVA). Methods: From a total of 66 patients, topical estrogen treatment was administered to 36 patients, and PRP treatment was used on 30 patients who had previously received topical estrogen treatment without obtaining a response. To assess the impact of VVA and associated symptoms on the quality of life of patients, three different questionnaires, namely the Vaginal Health Index (VHI), Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI), and the Vulvovaginal Symptoms Questionnaire (VSQ), along with a Visual Analog Scale (VAS), were administered at 4-week intervals. Results: In the assessment at the 12th week, the FSFI and VSQ results obtained in patients treated with PRP showed a significant difference compared with those treated with topical estrogen ( Conclusion: PRP injections are a safe and effective minimally invasive monotherapy for postmenopausal VVA and, consequently, vulvovaginal rejuvenation. PRP injections are regarded as a promising method for the treatment of VVA in postmenopausal patients with contraindications to hormone therapy and improving hydration of the vaginal mucosa.
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.