ReviewMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Use of Platelet-Rich Fibrin and Platelet-Rich Plasma as Delivery Systems for Natural Compounds: A Systematic Review.
Review in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesNatural compounds have gained increasing attention in regenerative dentistry and medicine because of their antimicrobial, anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and pro-healing properties. However, their clinical translation is often limited by poor stability, low bioavailability, and insufficient local retention. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) may help overcome these limitations by functioning as autologous scaffolds or local delivery systems. This systematic review evaluated the available evidence on the use of PRP and PRF as carriers, scaffolds, or delivery matrices for natural compounds in regenerative medicine and tissue healing.
methodsA systematic search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, and Embase from database inception to 1 April 2026, in accordance with PRISMA guidelines.
resultsThe search identified 113 records, of which 11 studies met the inclusion criteria. Six studies investigated PRP-based systems and five investigated PRF-based systems. Eleven studies were included: three in vitro or ex vivo biomaterial studies, three studies combining in vitro and animal experiments, three animal studies, and two clinical studies. The natural compounds evaluated included icariin, curcumin, tannic acid, propolis, tea polyphenols, gallic acid, oligomeric procyanidins, and Moringa oleifera. The strongest direct carrier evidence was observed for freeze-dried PRP loaded with icariin, which demonstrated sustained release and improved regenerative outcomes. Most PRF-based studies focused on scaffold modification or adjunctive use rather than strict carrier function. Overall, the included studies suggested favorable effects on scaffold properties, local delivery behavior, wound healing, and tissue regeneration, but the evidence was dominated by preclinical studies and showed a moderate-to-high risk of bias.
conclusionsPRP and PRF appear to be promising autologous platforms for the local delivery of natural compounds. However, the current evidence remains limited, heterogeneous, and largely preclinical, and well-designed clinical studies are needed before routine clinical application can be recommended.
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.