Scholarlink

<p>Autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) regenerative properties are used to treat clinical manifestations of skin aging. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of photothermal biomodulated PRP (PTBM-PRP) compared to standard PRP for skin rejuvenation. Prospective, split-face, randomized study including Thai volunteers (30–60 years) with Fitzpatrick skin type III-IV and moderate severity photoaging or higher conducted at Siriraj Hospital (Bangkok, Thailand). Face sides were randomized to receive intradermal autologous PTBM-PRP or PRP injections in three sessions at one-month intervals, with follow-up visits at one, three, and six months. PRP was preconditioned using the MCT System (Meta Cell Technology, Sant Cugat del Vallès, Spain) preset with the Exosomes program (467&#xa0;nm continuous light [1&#xa0;J/cm<sup>2</sup>], 37&#xa0;°C, 10&#xa0;min). We evaluated changes in skin surface characteristics, pigmentation, redness, and biomechanical properties (i.e., firmness, elasticity, and viscoelasticity), perceived facial improvement, and perceived pain. We included 28 volunteers (96.4% women) with a mean (SD) age of 40.82 (8.95) years and mostly skin type IV (67.86%). PTBM-PRP decreased fine lines maximum depth (<i>p</i> = 0.041) and indentation index (<i>p</i> = 0.005), folds maximum depth (<i>p</i> = 0.032) and indentation index (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001), and wrinkles maximum depth (<i>p</i> = 0.024) and indentation index (<i>p</i> = 0.041) in the periorbital area. PRP transiently decreased folds indentation index (<i>p</i> = 0.008) and wrinkles maximum depth (<i>p</i> = 0.0499) (PTBM-PRP vs. PRP wrinkles maximum depth <i>p</i> = 0.038 and indentation <i>p</i> = 0.018). Improvements in pigmentation, redness, and biomechanical properties were similar for both treatments. Patients perceived both treatment effects mostly as good or excellent improvement, with slightly favorable pain scores for PTBM-PRP vs. PRP, particularly at visit 3 (<i>p</i> = 0.006). Compared to standard PRP, PTBM-preconditioned PRP for facial skin rejuvenation results in greater improvements in fine lines, folds, and wrinkles parameters, with sustained effects for more than six months, supporting a PTBM protocol use to enhance the regenerative capacity of PRP in skin rejuvenation.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Efficacy and safety of photothermal biomodulated platelet-rich plasma versus standard platelet-rich plasma for facial rejuvenation: a prospective split-face randomized study

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年6月1日

查看全文
  • Rungsima Wanitphakdeedecha,
  • Ma. Patricia Gertrude Camille Rojas Ollero,
  • Woramate Bhorntarakcharoen,
  • Sariya Sittiwanaruk,
  • Wilailuck Phokai,
  • Thanakorn Woramongkol,
  • Thanya Techapichetvanich,
  • Pitchaya Maneeprasopchoke,
  • Panwadee Thongjaroensirikul,
  • Ya-Nin Nokdhes,
  • Pornsuk Yamlexnoi,
  • Onjira Meethong

摘要

Autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) regenerative properties are used to treat clinical manifestations of skin aging. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of photothermal biomodulated PRP (PTBM-PRP) compared to standard PRP for skin rejuvenation. Prospective, split-face, randomized study including Thai volunteers (30–60 years) with Fitzpatrick skin type III-IV and moderate severity photoaging or higher conducted at Siriraj Hospital (Bangkok, Thailand). Face sides were randomized to receive intradermal autologous PTBM-PRP or PRP injections in three sessions at one-month intervals, with follow-up visits at one, three, and six months. PRP was preconditioned using the MCT System (Meta Cell Technology, Sant Cugat del Vallès, Spain) preset with the Exosomes program (467 nm continuous light [1 J/cm2], 37 °C, 10 min). We evaluated changes in skin surface characteristics, pigmentation, redness, and biomechanical properties (i.e., firmness, elasticity, and viscoelasticity), perceived facial improvement, and perceived pain. We included 28 volunteers (96.4% women) with a mean (SD) age of 40.82 (8.95) years and mostly skin type IV (67.86%). PTBM-PRP decreased fine lines maximum depth (p = 0.041) and indentation index (p = 0.005), folds maximum depth (p = 0.032) and indentation index (p < 0.001), and wrinkles maximum depth (p = 0.024) and indentation index (p = 0.041) in the periorbital area. PRP transiently decreased folds indentation index (p = 0.008) and wrinkles maximum depth (p = 0.0499) (PTBM-PRP vs. PRP wrinkles maximum depth p = 0.038 and indentation p = 0.018). Improvements in pigmentation, redness, and biomechanical properties were similar for both treatments. Patients perceived both treatment effects mostly as good or excellent improvement, with slightly favorable pain scores for PTBM-PRP vs. PRP, particularly at visit 3 (p = 0.006). Compared to standard PRP, PTBM-preconditioned PRP for facial skin rejuvenation results in greater improvements in fine lines, folds, and wrinkles parameters, with sustained effects for more than six months, supporting a PTBM protocol use to enhance the regenerative capacity of PRP in skin rejuvenation.