Efficacy and safety of plasma gel versus platelet-rich plasma in periorbital rejuvenation: a comparative split-face clinical and Antera 3D camera study

Arch Dermatol Res. 2022 Sep;314(7):661-671. doi: 10.1007/s00403-021-02270-7. Epub 2021 Jul 6.


Background: Periorbital skin is the thinnest. That is why, it is the easiest to wrinkle and the most challenging to rejuvenate. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) as well as plasma gel have been used for skin rejuvenation and considered relatively safe and effective.

Methods: This split-face study was conducted on forty female patients seeking periorbital rejuvenation where PRP was injected in the right (Rt) side and plasma gel in the left (Lt) side, two treatment sessions 4 weeks apart (week 0 and week 4). Patients were followed up 2 weeks after each treatment session (week 2 and week 6) as well as 12 weeks after the last session (week 16) using both subjective [physician assessment through Global Aesthetic Improvement score (GAIS) and patient's satisfaction (Likert scale)] and objective [Antera 3D camera] assessment methods.

Results: Both modalities yielded a significant improvement of periorbital wrinkles after the 2nd session, with significantly better results on the plasma gel injected side; however, the improvement achieved through both modalities could not be maintained for the following 3 months. Besides, objective assessment could not prove any improvement in periorbital hyperpigmentation.

Conclusion: Two sessions of both PRP and plasma gel are effective for periorbital rejuvenation, with plasma gel showing significantly better results. However, improvement was not maintained for 3 months.

Keywords: Periorbital; Pigmentation; Plasma gel; Platelet-rich plasma; Wrinkles.

MeSH terms

  • Female
  • Humans
  • Patient Satisfaction
  • Platelet-Rich Plasma*
  • Rejuvenation
  • Skin / diagnostic imaging
  • Skin Aging*
  • Treatment Outcome