Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Systematic review comparing the effects of PRP and PRF in midface rejuvenation among menopausal women, suggesting clinical implications for treatment choices.
The application of autologous derivatives such as platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) has expanded in the field of orofacial harmonization, particularly in strategies aimed at rejuvenating the midface region. This study conducted a systematic review, analyzing 20 studies that were summarized and synthesized. The relevant literature comprises publications from 2015 to 2025 in the BVS, PubMed, and Science Direct databases The objective was to compare the clinical effects of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) in the midface region of menopausal women, considering aspects such as skin texture, firmness, and deep tissue response, investigating how the use of PRP, compared to PRF, may assist in rejuvenating this region during menopause. It is hypothesized that PRP and PRF exhibit similar efficacy, although with distinct clinical responses in facial rejuvenation. The comparison of autologous derivatives in this study indicates that both PRP and PRF are effective and safe for facial rejuvenation. Results demonstrated that PRF promotes gradual and sustained improvement, particularly in skin with volumetric loss associated with menopause, while PRP provides a more immediate and superficial effect. Although the results are encouraging, current literature highlights the need for larger and more rigorous clinical trials to validate these findings, standardize treatment protocols, and fully explore the therapeutic potential of autologous therapies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Müller et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: