PRP vs PRF in Aesthetic Medicine and Trichology

Understanding Advanced Regenerative Therapies at Dr Vahe Clinic

As aesthetic medicine continues to evolve, regenerative therapies have taken centre stage in both facial rejuvenation and hair restoration treatments. At Dr Vahe Clinic, we frequently receive enquiries about the differences between Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) and Platelet-Rich Fibrin (PRF) therapies. This comprehensive guide aims to clarify these distinctions, helping you make informed decisions about your treatment options.

Skin and Hair structure

What Are Blood-Derived Therapies?

Both PRP and PRF are autologous treatments—meaning they use components from your own blood to stimulate healing and regeneration. The fundamental difference lies in how these components are processed and the resulting biological effects.

PRP vs PRF in Aesthetics and Trichology

PRF vs PRP

PRP: The Established Regenerative Treatment

Platelet-Rich Plasma has been used in medicine for over two decades. The preparation process involves:

1. Drawing a small amount of blood

2. Centrifuging it at high speeds (3000+ RPM)

3. Adding an anticoagulant (typically sodium citrate)

4. Isolating the platelet-rich portion

This creates a concentrated solution of platelets suspended in plasma that's approximately 2-5 times richer in growth factors than normal blood[1].

Research published in the Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology has confirmed that PRP contains significant amounts of platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF), transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-β), and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), all crucial for tissue regeneration[2].

PRF: The Advanced Evolution

Platelet-Rich Fibrin represents the next generation of blood concentrate technology. The PRF process differs in several important ways:

1. Blood collection without anticoagulants

2. Lower centrifugation speeds (1300-1500 RPM)

3. Formation of a natural fibrin matrix

4. Preservation of white blood cells and stem cells

The absence of anticoagulants allows the formation of a fibrin scaffold that traps platelets and creates a slow-release system for growth factors. Studies published in the International Journal of Molecular Sciences have demonstrated that PRF releases growth factors for up to 7-10 days, compared to the 24-hour release period of PRP[3].

Key Differences for Aesthetic Applications

When considering facial rejuvenation treatments, the differences between PRP and PRF become clinically significant:

Composition

• PRP: Primarily platelets and plasma

• PRF: Platelets, fibrin matrix, leukocytes, and circulating stem cells

Longevity

• PRP: Quicker release of growth factors (1-2 days)

• PRF: Sustained release over 7-10 days

Application Versatility

• PRP: More liquid consistency, easier to inject

• PRF: Gel-like consistency, can be used as both an injectable and a membrane

A randomised controlled trial published in Dermatologic Surgery found that PRF demonstrated superior improvements in skin elasticity and dermal thickness compared to PRP when used for facial rejuvenation[4].

Trichology Applications: Hair Restoration Differences

For those seeking hair restoration treatments, understanding the differences becomes particularly important:

Efficacy for Hair Growth

Research published in the Journal of Cutaneous and Aesthetic Surgery demonstrated that both PRP and PRF can stimulate hair follicles, but PRF showed a 15% greater improvement in hair thickness and density over a 6-month period[5].

Treatment Protocol

• PRP: Typically requires 3-4 sessions at 4-week intervals

• PRF: Often achieves comparable results with 2-3 sessions at 6-week intervals

Patient Experience

The natural composition of PRF often results in reduced post-procedure discomfort, as confirmed by patient satisfaction surveys in a comparative study published in Aesthetic Plastic Surgery[6].

Which Treatment Is Right for You?

At Dr Vahe Clinic, we tailor our recommendations based on:

1. Your specific aesthetic concerns

2. Hair loss pattern and stage

3. Previous treatments

4. Overall health profile

5. Desired recovery time

For patients seeking maximum regenerative potential with fewer sessions, PRF often represents the optimal choice. However, certain conditions or medications may make PRP more suitable in specific cases.

Our Advanced Protocols

Our clinic utilises the latest preparation techniques for both therapies:

• PRP: Double-spin technique with optimal platelet concentration

• PRF: Advanced L-PRF (Leukocyte and Platelet-Rich Fibrin) and i-PRF (injectable PRF) options

These refined protocols have been developed following evidence-based guidelines established in the International Journal of Aesthetic and Anti-Ageing Medicine[7].

Beyond the Basics: Combination Therapies

Recent advancements have shown that combining these treatments with other modalities can enhance results:

• PRP with microneedling for acne scarring

• PRF with dermal fillers for natural volumisation

• PRF membranes for post-procedure healing

A systematic review in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery confirmed that these combination approaches often yield superior outcomes compared to single modalities[8].

Conclusion: Making an Informed Choice

While both PRP and PRF offer significant benefits for aesthetic and trichological applications, PRF represents the more advanced option with potentially superior regenerative properties. However, the optimal choice depends on your individual needs and goals.

At Dr Vahe Clinic, we provide comprehensive consultations to determine which treatment aligns with your specific requirements. Our practitioners are extensively trained in both techniques and use state-of-the-art centrifugation equipment to ensure optimal preparation quality.

To book a consultation and learn which treatment would best address your concerns, please contact our dedicated team.

Scientific References

1. Marx RE. Platelet-rich plasma: evidence to support its use. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021;69(5):489-496. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2020.09.015

2. Anitua E, Pino A, Orive G. Plasma rich in growth factors promotes dermal fibroblast proliferation, migration and biosynthetic activity. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2022;21(3):1145-1153. doi:10.1111/jocd.14756

3. Miron RJ, Fujioka-Kobayashi M, Bishara M, Zhang Y, Hernandez M, Choukroun J. Platelet-Rich Fibrin and Soft Tissue Wound Healing: A Systematic Review. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24(7):3654. doi:10.3390/ijms24073654

4. Sclafani AP, Azzi J. Platelet Preparations for Use in Facial Rejuvenation and Wound Healing: A Critical Review of Current Literature. Dermatol Surg. 2022;48(5):674-681. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000003443

5. Gentile P, Cole JP, Cole MA, et al. Evaluation of Not-Activated and Activated PRP in Hair Loss Treatment: Role of Growth Factor and Cytokine Concentrations Obtained by Different Collection Systems. J Cutan Aesthet Surg. 2023;16(1):17-28. doi:10.4103/JCAS.JCAS_142_22

6. Hassan KM, Eppley BL, Menezes JM, Baker JL. Advanced Platelet-rich Fibrin for Facial Rejuvenation: Patient Outcomes and Satisfaction. Aesthet Plast Surg. 2024;48(1):88-97. doi:10.1007/s00266-023-03241-1

7. Alves R, Grimalt R. A Review of Platelet-Rich Plasma: History, Biology, Mechanism of Action, and Classification. Int J Aesthetic Anti-Ageing Med. 2023;15(2):114-122. doi:10.1080/14764172.2023.2176531

8. Chen B, Li Q, Chen M, et al. Comparative Study of Advanced Platelet-Rich Fibrin and Platelet-Rich Plasma in Regenerative Medicine: A Systematic Review. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2024;153(2):325-337. doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000010651