PRP for Your Face: What the Evidence Shows for Texture, Acne Scars, and Under-Eyes

Ashley Harwyn, PA-C, ABAAHP  |  Published April 24, 2025  |  Last updated October 6, 2026  |  20 min read

Facial PRP has fair support for acne scars when paired with microneedling, thin support for fine lines, and mixed results under the eyes. Here is each grade, with the study behind it.

This post grades each facial concern separately instead of treating PRP as one promise. A masked, saline-controlled trial on photoaged cheeks found no difference on the masked dermatologists' ratings, even though patients rated the PRP side's texture as more improved.[2] Below we take each concern in turn, show you the study behind each grade, explain the safety lesson from a CDC investigation of a New Mexico spa, and point hair questions to our platelet-rich plasma (PRP) overview and the hair pages built for them.

• PRP is a concentrate of platelets from your own blood.[5] The FDA category for the kits that prepare it describes preparing PRP for mixing with bone graft; the definition does not mention skin.[8]
• For acne scars, a 2022 meta-analysis of 14 studies (472 patients) found microneedling plus PRP outperformed microneedling alone, though only 4 of those studies were randomized.[4]
• For fine lines and texture, a masked, saline-controlled cheek trial found no difference on dermatologist ratings, while patients rated the PRP side better.[2]
• An overview of 13 systematic reviews concluded the evidence is insufficient for firm conclusions about PRP for facial rejuvenation.[1]
• Under the eyes, a 2025 review found PRP's stronger evidence was for dark pigment, while a related product, PRF, was linked more to texture. In one randomized trial, 8 of 15 PRP patients did not respond.[5][6]
• PRP is a blood product. In 2024 the CDC reported likely HIV transmission tied to PRP microneedling facials at an unlicensed spa that did not follow recommended infection control.[9]

What is PRP, and what is it supposed to do for facial skin?

Platelet-rich plasma starts as an ordinary blood draw. A 2025 review describes a double-spin centrifugation process that leaves an increased concentration of the patient's own platelets suspended in plasma.[5] Those platelets carry growth factors, proteins with names like platelet-derived growth factor and vascular endothelial growth factor.[5] The idea behind facial PRP is to deliver those signals where you want new collagen. The same review's authors add that collagen production from growth factors is neither guaranteed nor the same from one person to the next.[5]

That is a hypothesis, not a result. The research question is whether faces treated with PRP look measurably different from faces that did not get it, judged by someone who does not know which was which. In the 2024 overview described below, 18 of the 28 primary studies on facial rejuvenation were uncontrolled reports.[1]

The studies here deliver PRP to facial skin in two ways. It can be injected into the skin with a fine needle, as in the cheek trial below, or it can be applied to skin that has just been treated with microneedling or a laser.[2][4] Our laser facial page describes PRP being “applied to or injected into the freshly treated skin.” The studies below use both methods, so we note which one each study tested.

It also helps to know what the FDA has and has not looked at. The kits that prepare PRP are cleared as Class II devices through the 510(k) pathway, under a category defined as preparing PRP “for mixing with bone graft to improve handling characteristics.”[8] Nothing in that definition covers wrinkles, scars, or dark circles. Our PRP overview describes these facial uses as off-label, so the evidence for each one has to carry the weight on its own.

A second regulatory detail matters for the most popular version, PRP with microneedling. The FDA states that it has not cleared any microneedling device for use with another product, platelet-rich plasma included, which means the agency “hasn't reviewed the safety or effectiveness” of the combination.[7] So any judgment about the pairing rests on the published studies below, not on an FDA review.

Does PRP actually smooth texture and fine lines?

The one saline-controlled trial among the studies cited here is a randomized trial from Northwestern University published in JAMA Dermatology in 2018. Adults aged 18 to 70 with wrinkles on both cheeks got 3 mL of PRP injected into the skin of one cheek and sterile saline into the other. The participants and the two dermatologists rating the results were both kept unaware of which side was which.[2] Twenty-seven people enrolled and 19 were analyzed.[2]

The two masked dermatologists scored fine lines, blotchy pigment, roughness, and sallowness. At every check, out to six months, they found no significant difference between the PRP cheek and the saline cheek. For fine lines, the average was 0.95 on both sides at six months.[2] The participants saw it differently. Six months after one treatment, they rated the PRP side as more improved for texture (2.00 versus 1.21) and for wrinkles (1.74 versus 1.21), and both gaps were statistically significant.[2]

How do you read a split like that? The authors' conclusion reports both sides: participants noted significantly more texture improvement with PRP, and both participants and raters found PRP “nominally but not significantly superior” to saline.[2] Patients reported a texture change that the masked dermatologists did not confirm, and with 19 people analyzed, this is a small trial. Quoting it only for its patient ratings leaves out its primary outcome, the dermatologists' scores.[2]

Wider reviews land in a similar place. A 2020 systematic review of 24 studies, 8 of them randomized, with 480 patients who received PRP, found that injected PRP “at least temporarily” produced modest improvement in facial appearance, texture, and lines, with improvement usually under 50 percent.[3] It also found that adding PRP sped healing after fractional laser resurfacing, and it stated that how long these effects persist is not known.[3]

The 2024 overview is the most sobering. It examined 13 systematic reviews built on 28 primary studies, 18 of them uncontrolled reports.[1] Only one review ran a meta-analysis on facial rejuvenation, finding higher patient satisfaction when PRP was added to another treatment, at low certainty.[1] Confidence in 12 of the 13 reviews was graded low or critically low, and the authors concluded the evidence is “insufficient to suggest firm conclusions” about PRP, alone or combined.[1]

So for fine lines, the evidence cited here does not show a difference a masked rater could see. If those are your main goals, our skin care page describes a daily routine built around broad-spectrum sunscreen, and our laser facial page describes adding PRP as an option with unproven benefit. Both are worth raising at a visit.

Can PRP help acne scars?

Among the facial uses graded here, acne scars have the strongest pooled result, and even here the result comes with an asterisk. The 2022 meta-analysis compared microneedling with and without PRP, so it tested PRP as a partner to microneedling, not as a treatment on its own.[4] The FDA notes that microneedling products with longer needles penetrate the skin and reach deeper layers that have living cells, nerves, and blood vessels.[7]

That meta-analysis, published in Frontiers in Medicine, pooled 14 studies and 472 patients.[4] With PRP added, the odds of more than 50 percent improvement on a standard acne scar scale were 2.97 times higher, and patients were more often satisfied.[4] Rates of severe redness and severe swelling were not significantly different between the two approaches.[4]

Now the asterisk. Only 4 of the 14 studies were randomized. The other 10 were split-face studies without randomization, where one side of the face got PRP and the other did not.[4] In those studies, which side got PRP was not randomized.[4] The pooled finding is encouraging. It does not tell you the size of the benefit you personally would see.

It also helps to match the treatment to the scar. Our acne scar treatment page explains that the right procedure depends on the shape of each scar and walks through the options for each shape. It also notes that scar work usually waits until acne treatment has the breakouts under control.

Our microneedling page states that Solcara performs microneedling with SkinPen and offers PRP as an optional add-on. The FDA has cleared microneedling devices to improve the appearance of facial acne scars in adults 22 and older.[7] Adding PRP to that session is the off-label part, since no microneedling device is cleared for use with another product, PRP included.[7] Whether that trade is worth it for your scars is a good question to raise at your visit.

Wondering if PRP is worth adding for your scars? Call 843-981-0870. Ask what microneedling alone is expected to do for your scar type, and what the research cited here says PRP may add, before you decide.

Is PRP worth trying for dark circles and under-eye skin?

“Under-eye” covers several different problems. A 2025 systematic review in the Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology notes that patient concerns often include infraorbital hollows, hyperpigmentation, and wrinkles, which may be treated with distinct techniques.[5]

That review gathered 14 studies on injected PRP and a related product, platelet-rich fibrin (PRF), around the eyes. Its conclusion was split by problem: PRP showed stronger evidence for pigmentation, while PRF was linked more to improvements in texture, wrinkles, and crepiness.[5] PRP results for pigmentation were reported as sustained at around six months. Reported side effects were mild and transient, and the authors called for more studies with standardized preparation and objective measurements.[5]

The randomized studies inside that review are where the mixed picture shows. In one double-blinded randomized trial of 42 patients with under-eye pigmentation, published by Sadiq and colleagues in 2024, a “biofiller” did better than PRP on a pigmentation scale, on a blinded dermatologist's rating, and on patient satisfaction, and the PRP group reported more pain and bruising (9 of 21 reported pain, 6 of 21 bruising). The 2025 review lists that comparison as PRP versus platelet-poor plasma (PPP) biofillers.[5]

A separate single-blinded randomized trial in Dermatologic Surgery compared PRP with fat transfer plus nanofat in 30 patients whose dark circles had combined causes.[6] In the PRP group, 3 of 15 had an excellent response and 2 had a moderate one, while 8 of 15, a little over half, did not respond. In the fat transfer group, only 1 of 15 did not respond, and the authors judged fat transfer significantly superior in improvement and satisfaction.[6]

Put plainly: if your under-eye concern is mostly pigment, PRP has some small-study support. For hollows, the review notes that hyaluronic acid filler is currently the most common in-office treatment.[5] If your concern is fine crinkly lines at rest, our SmoothEye laser page explains a non-ablative erbium option and its own limits.

Under-eye PRP injection is not among the PRP uses listed on our site. Our PRP page describes PRP for thinning hair and as an add-on to microneedling or a laser facial. We include the under-eye research so the grade is available to you either way.

How strong is the evidence for each facial use?

Here is the grading in one place. “Best evidence” means the strongest study design we found for that specific use, not the most enthusiastic result. Read the right-hand column as our summary of the cited research, not a prediction for your face.

Two patterns stand out in the studies cited here. The one masked, saline-controlled trial found no dermatologist-rated difference[2], while the meta-analysis that included non-randomized split-face studies reported a benefit for scars.[4] And the clearest positive results come from PRP added to another treatment, microneedling for scars[4] and healing after laser resurfacing[3], rather than PRP on its own.

Whether an optional add-on is worth the extra cost and the blood draw is a personal decision. It is a fair question to raise at your visit, along with what the main treatment is expected to do on its own.

Is PRP safe for your face, and what went wrong with “vampire facials”?

In the studies cited here, reported side effects from facial PRP were mostly short-lived. In the cheek trial, redness, swelling, and bruising were common, and the authors reported these adverse events as not associated with the study agent. No participant reported any adverse event at 12 months.[2] The 2020 review concluded PRP injections are safe and may be modestly beneficial, and the periorbital review reported only mild, transient adverse effects.[3][5]

The most serious harm in the sources cited here was linked to infection control failures. In 2024 the CDC described a New Mexico investigation that found likely HIV transmission associated with PRP microneedling facials, which it called vampire facials, given at an unlicensed spa.[9] Investigators identified four former clients and one sexual partner of a client with HIV diagnoses made between 2018 and 2023, and the virus strains were highly similar.[9] The spa did not follow recommended infection control procedures or maintain client records.[9]

The details in that report are worth reading. Inspectors found a centrifuge, a heating dry bath, and a rack of unlabeled tubes of blood on a kitchen counter, and disposable electric desiccator tips that were cleaned in alcohol and reused.[9] The report states that HIV transmission through cosmetic injection services via contaminated blood had not been previously documented.[9] Its authors wrote that requiring adequate infection control and client records at spas offering cosmetic injection services can help prevent HIV and other bloodborne infections.[9]

The FDA offers questions any patient can ask before microneedling, and they apply when PRP is involved too.[7]

• Is the person treating me specially trained in microneedling?[7] Is the facility licensed?[9]
• Is a new needle cartridge used for each patient and each session? Reusing cartridges can cause or spread infection.[7]
• How are reusable parts cleaned and disinfected between patients?[7]
• Do I take a blood thinner, or have a bleeding or clotting disorder, eczema, diabetes, or a weakened immune system? The FDA says microneedling may not suit people in these groups.[7]

Using your own blood does not make the procedure risk-free. The FDA lists bleeding, bruising, redness, peeling, dark or light spots, cold sore flare-ups, swollen lymph nodes, and infection among possible microneedling side effects, and asks patients to mention any allergy or sensitivity to numbing medication.[7] Mention any history of cold sores or dark marks after skin injuries at your visit.

How to decide whether PRP belongs in your plan, for skin or hair

Solcara sees patients at our Mount Pleasant office on Bramson Court and at The Longevity Club on Rutledge Avenue in downtown Charleston. It helps to arrive knowing what is actually bothering you: scars and their shape, texture, pigment, under-eye changes, or active breakouts.

The evidence grades above give you questions to bring. For acne scars, ask what microneedling alone is expected to do and what PRP might add, knowing the combination is off-label.[7] For fine lines, ask about the masked cheek trial and the alternatives.[2] For under-eye hollows, ask about the options the periorbital review describes.[5] Ask for a plan and a point at which to judge results; our PRP page describes both.

A few habits make any facial PRP plan easier to judge, wherever you have it done:

• Name one target. “My rolling scars on the left cheek” can be judged. “Better skin” cannot.
• Take standardized photos before the first session, in the same light and at the same angle.
• Agree on when to judge it. The cheek trial checked results out to six months, so compare photos months after treatment, not days.[2]
• Decide in advance what happens if nothing changes, so a second series is a choice rather than a reflex.
• Ask who prepares the PRP, how, and with what sterile, single-use equipment.

Thinning hair is a separate question with its own research, and we cover it in depth elsewhere, so here is the short version. Our hair page describes PRP for hair as injected into thinning areas of the scalp, studied mainly in hereditary pattern hair loss (androgenetic alopecia). A 2024 meta-analysis of 13 randomized trials found a mean difference of 27.55 hairs per square centimeter with PRP compared with placebo.[10] The studies were highly heterogeneous, showed evident publication bias, and were rated low quality, and the estimate for hair shaft diameter was compatible with no change at all.[10]

Thinning also has other causes. Our PRP hair restoration page describes looking for causes such as thyroid problems or low iron before deciding whether PRP adds anything. If you want the local cost picture and session math, our guide to PRP hair restoration cost in Charleston lays it out.

Ashley Harwyn, PA-C PA-C, ABAAHP · Founder, Solcara Health Online

Tap a question to ask