PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 29, 2026British journal of surgery0 citations

SRS147 - Advantages of using platelet-rich plasma at the donor site after skin grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysis

View Full Paper
FZFeras ZaqoutLALaura AwadASAdvait Sapre

Key Points

  • This research explores the impact of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) on healing and pain at the donor site post-skin grafting.
  • Conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies from Embase, PubMed, and Scopus.
  • Included studies comparing outcomes of patients treated with PRP versus standard dressing.
  • Performed statistical analysis to evaluate differences in pain, re-epithelialization, and scarring.
  • PRP group experienced significantly lower pain levels at postoperative days 3, 7, 14, and 21.
  • PRP treatment led to faster re-epithelialization rates, with an odds ratio of 4.91.
  • Patients treated with PRP had shorter healing times and a lower incidence of scarring.

Abstract

Abstract Background Split-thickness skin grafting is a fundamental technique in Plastic Surgery, though it carries a drawback of creating a secondary wound at the donor site, which leads to complications such as pain, scarring, itching, pruritus or dyschromia. Objective Explore the adjunct biological application of Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) to standard dressing at the donor site, in comparison to the standard dressing alone. Investigate the outcomes of pain, healing time, re-epithelialization, incidence of scar, and pruritus/itching. Methods A Systematic Review was conducted searching Embase, PubMed and Scopus until April 2025 (n = 471). Studies must compare at least one outcome. Statistical analysis was performed. Results Eight studies were included, resulting in a total of 170 patients having 172 wounds in the PRP group, and 172 patients having 174 wounds in the control group. Mean follow up was 2.2 months, and mean age was 49.35. Our meta-analysis indicated a statistically significant lower pain in the PRP group (standardized mean difference = −0.59, 95%-c.i. = −0.93, 0.25; P value = 0.0006) at postoperative day 7, besides lower pain scales across postoperative days 3,14, and 21. The PRP re-epithelization was significantly faster (OR = 4.91; 95%-c.i. = 2.13, 11.30; P value = 0.0002). The PRP healing days range were shorter and incidence of scar was lower. Conclusions The application of PRP as a biological adjunctive therapy improves graft donor site outcomes: pain reduction, accelerated re-epithelialization rates and shorter healing days. PRP represents a promising strategy for wound morbidity reduction, incidence of scar and shorter hospital stay.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Zaqout et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69c8c25dde0f0f753b39ca5bhttps://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znag018.143
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper