ReviewCureus2026
Adjuvant Platelet-Rich Fibrin (PRF) Therapy for Wound-Bed Conditioning and Facial Flap Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Tissue Perfusion and Post-oncological Scar Remodeling.
Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Facial oncologic surgery can create defects requiring local, regional, or free-flap reconstruction. Platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) is an autologous fibrin matrix containing platelets and leukocytes that has been investigated as a wound-bed conditioning adjunct; however, its role in post-oncological facial flap reconstruction remains uncertain. The objective of this study is to map literature published from 2022 through 2026 on PRF-assisted wound-bed conditioning relevant to tissue perfusion, flap or graft viability, wound healing, and scar remodeling in facial and head-and-neck reconstruction. A structured evidence map informed by PRISMA 2020 reporting principles used PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and supplementary reference-list searching. Human clinical, preclinical, and in vitro evidence was grouped separately to avoid conflating evidential weight. Seventeen core reports were included: 16 human clinical reports and one preclinical flap study. A prospective randomized study of radial forearm flap donor-site reconstruction reported higher skin-graft survival with PRF placed between the wound bed and graft. A case report described delayed deep wound healing after tracheotomy or lymph-node dissection. Adjacent oral and maxillofacial randomized trials reported improvements in selected morbidity or early-healing outcomes, while facial skin studies reported changes in dermal density or scar-related outcomes. To our knowledge, no study directly evaluated objective perfusion, viability, or scar outcomes in post-oncological facial flaps. PRF is biologically plausible as a wound-bed adjunct, but evidence is insufficient to support routine use in post-oncological facial flap reconstruction. Future multicenter studies should use standardized PRF protocols and objective perfusion and scar measures, including laser Doppler methods, indocyanine green angiography, and validated scar scales.
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.