ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparative analysis of liquid and gel platelet rich plasma from apheresis and buffy coat in wound healing.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Mechanism of Platelet-Rich Plasma in Promoting Diabetic Wound Healing via the PI3K/AKT Signaling Pathway to Regulate Collagen Synthesis and Angiogenesis.Journal of diabetes research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) is widely used in wound care and tissue regeneration, yet variability in its preparation and delivery has hindered clinical standardization. This study compares the regenerative potential of PRP formulations derived from apheresis (Aphe PRP) and buffy-coat (BC PRP), in both liquid and gel forms. We characterized the seven-day release profile of platelet-derived effectors and assessed the impact of PRP on key wound-healing cellular processes-proliferation, migration, and differentiation-using keratinocytes, fibroblasts, and microvascular endothelial cell models. Our findings revealed a sustained effector release over seven days, with liquid PRPs showing significantly higher release levels than gels, regardless of PRP source. Aphe and BC PRPs exhibited comparable effects on cell proliferation, migration, and differentiation. However, gel PRPs were less effective than liquid PRPs in promoting proliferation and migration, although both forms significantly enhanced regeneration compared to untreated controls. Notably, differentiation effects were similar across all PRP types. These results suggest Aphe and BC PRPs are interchangeable for wound care, with liquid PRPs offering superior regenerative effects in early treatment stages. This study highlights the need for standardized PRP preparation and application protocols to optimize therapeutic outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.