Comparison of Two Anticoagulants for Pain Associated with Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections
- 30 Downloads
Background and Aim
Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has long been used in skin rejuvenation and hair loss treatment. Some patients require multiple intradermal injections into the face and scalp, and the way in which these patients process and experience pain differs, depending on the patient. Minimizing pain and discomfort during nonsurgical procedures is essential for patient satisfaction. In our experience, the use of acid citrate dextrose-A (ACD-A) as an anticoagulant caused more patient discomfort than did sodium citrate (Na-citrate) among patients who underwent facial rejuvenation with PRP. The aim of the present study was to evaluate patient-related discomfort in PRP sessions using two different anticoagulants.
Materials and Methods
This clinical trial included 10 patients who received facial PRP injections for facial rejuvenation and 10 patients who received PRP injections in their scalps for hair loss. On the application area, half the surface was treated with Na-citrate PRP injections, and the other half was treated with the same amount of ACD-A PRP injections. Neither the doctors who applied the treatment nor the patients were given information about which anticoagulant was used in each area. Immediately after the procedure, the patients were asked to score their pain on each side of the application area on a scale of 1–10 using a visual analog scale (VAS).
PRP injections using Na-citrate as an anticoagulant caused less discomfort on both the face and scalp as compared with that of ACD-A. The outcome was statistically significant.
Anticoagulants used in PRP preparation affected patients’ pain perceptions during the injections. The sensation of pain with PRP prepared with Na-citrate as an anticoagulant was lower than that of PRP prepared with ACD-A. Further studies are required to evaluate the correlation between anticoagulants used for PRP preparation and pain feelings during injections.
Level of Evidence III
This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.
KeywordsPRP Platelet-rich plasma Anticoagulant Pain
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
This study has Bolu Abant Izzet Baysal University Clinical Researches Ethics Committee Approval (2019/99).
All participants signed an informed consent forms for this study.
- 7.Taddio A, Ilersich AL, Ipp M, Kikuta A, Shah V, HELPinKIDS Team (2009) Physical interventions and injection techniques for reducing injection pain during routine childhood immunizations: systematic review of randomized controlled trials and quasi-randomized controlled trials. Clin Ther 31(Suppl 2):S48–S76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinthera.2009.07.024 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 16.Araki J, Jona M, Eto H et al (2012) Optimized preparation method of platelet-concentrated plasma and noncoagulating platelet-derived factor concentrates: maximization of platelet concentration and removal of fibrinogen. Tissue Eng C Methods 18(3):176–185. https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.TEC.2011.0308 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Mazzucco L, Balbo V, Cattana E, Guaschino R, Borzini P (2009) Not every PRP-gel is born equal. Evaluation of growth factor availability for tissues through four PRP-gel preparations: Fibrinet, RegenPRP-Kit, Plateltex and one manual procedure. Vox Sang 97(2):110–118. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1423-04https://doi.org/10.2009.01188.x