Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: As interest in innovative facial rejuvenation therapies continues to grow, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) have emerged as promising treatment options. OBJECTIVE: To review the current medical literature, including efficacy and safety, pertaining to PRP, PRF, and platelet-based products use in facial rejuvenation, both for skin quality and augmentation as monotherapy and in combination with fillers, autologous fat, microneedling, and energy-based devices. METHODS: PubMed/MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library were searched through June 2026 for English-language peer-reviewed human studies of platelet-based products in facial rejuvenation; reference lists were hand-searched. RESULTS: The strongest evidence for the use of platelet-based therapies exists in improving overall skin quality, whether alone or in combination with more traditional facial rejuvenation methods. Data for true volume restoration remain more preliminary. Overall, platelet therapies have a satisfactory safety profile. Despite the growing evidence base supporting platelet concentrate efficacy for various indications, overall evidence quality remains poor and unstandardized. CONCLUSION: Current literature describing use of platelet concentrate in facial rejuvenation and soft tissue augmentation is promising. Substantial variation in product preparation, study design, and reporting measures limits general conclusions and, therefore, widespread adoption of these products in dermatology clinics.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ticknor et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: