PRP Vs PRF Injections: How They Compare For Hair Loss
Last reviewed on 25 September 2026. We review our treatment guides every six months to keep them accurate.
Key points
They are close cousins. Both PRP (platelet-rich plasma) and PRF (platelet-rich fibrin) are made from a small sample of your own blood, spun in a centrifuge and injected into the scalp to stimulate the follicles with concentrated growth factors.
PRF is the newer, "second-generation" version. It is prepared without the anticoagulant used for PRP and forms a fibrin scaffold that releases its growth factors more slowly and steadily, and it also carries white cells and other components.
Neither adds hair or treats the cause. Both stimulate follicles that are still there, so they can thicken thinning areas but cannot regrow a bald patch, and neither lowers the hormone (DHT) behind male pattern loss.
Early evidence slightly favours PRF, but it is limited. In one head-to-head trial, injectable PRF increased hair count by about 27 per cent versus about 15 per cent for PRP, with fewer side effects, though the study was small and the overall evidence base for both is still developing.
PRP has the longer track record. It has been used and studied for longer, so there is more evidence behind it, even if that evidence is itself mixed.
Both need repeated sessions and upkeep. Each is given as a course of treatments and topped up over time, so both are an ongoing commitment and cost.
Which to choose, or whether either suits you, is best decided with a clinician, and both are often combined with medication or used around a hair transplant rather than instead of them.
PRP and PRF are two closely related "regenerative" injections that use your own blood to try to boost hair growth. They are so similar that people often ask what the difference is and which is better. In short, PRF is a newer refinement of PRP, and while early evidence is slightly more favourable for PRF, both work in the same way and share the same limitations.
This guide compares PRP and PRF neutrally: what each is, how they differ, how effective they are, what they cost you in sessions and money, who each suits, and how they fit with other treatments. It is general information and not a substitute for advice from a doctor.
The short answer
PRP and PRF do the same job in almost the same way: both concentrate the growth factors from your own blood and inject them into the scalp to stimulate the follicles you still have. The difference is in the preparation. PRP uses an anticoagulant and releases its growth factors in a quick burst; PRF is made without an anticoagulant and sets into a fibrin mesh that releases them more slowly, and it includes more of the blood’s cells. So PRF is best thought of as an evolution of PRP rather than a different treatment, and the real question is whether its slower, richer release translates into a better result, where the early evidence is promising but still thin.
What is PRP?
PRP, platelet-rich plasma, is made by taking a small sample of your blood and spinning it in a centrifuge to concentrate the platelets, which is then injected into the scalp. As a review of PRP for hair loss describes, its "composition encompasses a rich variety of biological components such as platelets, growth factors, cytokines, and other bioactive proteins", and those growth factors stimulate the dermal papilla cells that drive the hair follicle. The evidence is encouraging but mixed: the review found that "the majority of studies demonstrated that PRP is effective in increasing hair density and thickness in patients with" androgenetic alopecia, while cautioning that "results varied due to differences in preparation protocols, platelet concentration, and delivery methods". Our guide on PRP injections for hair loss covers it in detail.
What is PRF?
PRF, platelet-rich fibrin, is the newer version of the same idea. It is prepared from your blood too, but without the anticoagulant used for PRP and at a lower centrifuge speed, so it behaves differently. As a review of the platelet-concentrate generations puts it, "PRF was introduced as a second-generation product that eliminated the need for anticoagulants and provided a three-dimensional fibrin scaffold for sustained growth factor release". In practice that means PRF sets into a soft fibrin mesh that lets the growth factors out gradually rather than all at once, and it captures more of the blood’s white cells and other regenerative components. The injectable liquid form used for hair is often called i-PRF; our guide on PRF for hair loss explains it.
Which is more effective for hair loss?
The early, direct evidence slightly favours PRF, but it is limited and both are still being established. A randomised trial comparing the two in women with pattern hair loss found that the increase in hair count was significantly greater with injectable PRF, about 26.5 per cent, than with PRP, about 14.5 per cent, and that the PRF group "had the lowest adverse event rate". That fits the theory that a slower, sustained release of growth factors from the fibrin scaffold may work better than PRP’s quick burst.
Two caveats matter, though. First, this is a small, single trial in women, and the wider evidence base for both PRP and PRF is modest and variable, so it would be overstating things to call PRF clearly superior across the board. Second, PRP has been used for longer and has the larger body of evidence behind it. So the fair summary is that PRF is a promising refinement with encouraging early head-to-head data, while PRP remains the more established of the two.
PRP vs PRF: how do they compare?
The two are very similar, and differ mainly in how they are prepared and behave:
Preparation: PRP is spun with an anticoagulant to keep it liquid; PRF is spun without one, at a lower speed, so it is more "natural" and sets into a fibrin mesh.
Growth-factor release: PRP releases its growth factors in a quick burst; PRF’s fibrin scaffold releases them slowly and steadily over a longer period.
What is in it: both are rich in platelets and growth factors; PRF also captures more white cells and other regenerative components.
Evidence: PRP has the longer track record and more studies (though mixed); PRF is newer, with promising early head-to-head data but a smaller evidence base.
Sessions and cost: both are given as an initial course of injections with maintenance top-ups, so both are an ongoing commitment; costs are broadly similar.
Comfort and side effects: both are minimally invasive injections using your own blood, generally well tolerated; in the head-to-head trial PRF had the lowest rate of side effects.
What neither does: neither adds new hair, restores a bald area, or lowers the hormone that causes male pattern loss, so both are for supporting thinning hair rather than replacing lost hair.
Which is right for you?
Because the two are so alike, the choice often comes down to what a clinic offers, the current evidence, and cost. PRF is the newer option, is prepared more naturally without additives, and has encouraging early data suggesting a bigger effect with fewer side effects, which makes it an appealing choice where it is available. PRP is the more established treatment with a longer track record, and remains a perfectly reasonable option. Neither, though, suits someone whose loss is advanced or whose follicles are already gone, because both only support hair that is still there.
As with any treatment where the evidence is still developing, it is worth having realistic expectations and choosing a reputable provider, and discussing with a clinician whether an injectable treatment is the right step for your pattern of loss at all.
Can they be combined with other treatments?
Yes, and in practice both PRP and PRF are usually part of a wider plan rather than a treatment on their own. Because neither addresses the hormonal cause of male pattern loss, they are often used alongside the medical mainstays, and comparing those is covered in our guides on finasteride versus minoxidil and minoxidil. They also sit within the wider set of regenerative options such as exosome therapy and mesotherapy.
Neither can restore hair that is already gone. Where loss is more advanced, a hair transplant is a separate option that redistributes your own permanent hair, and PRP or PRF is sometimes used as an add-on around the surgery; our guide on hair transplant versus PRP looks at that. The key point is that PRP and PRF are companions to a treatment plan, not a cure on their own.
The bottom line
PRP and PRF are close cousins: both use concentrated growth factors from your own blood to stimulate the follicles you still have, and neither adds hair, restores a bald area, or treats the hormonal cause of hair loss. PRF is the newer, second-generation version, prepared without an anticoagulant and releasing its growth factors more slowly from a fibrin scaffold, and early head-to-head data suggest it may outperform PRP with fewer side effects, though that evidence is limited and PRP has the longer track record. Both need repeated sessions and are best seen as part of a wider plan.
If you are weighing them up, a clinician can advise which, if either, suits your hair loss, and how it might fit alongside medication or a hair transplant. Whichever you choose, keep expectations realistic and pick a reputable provider.
Frequently asked questions
Is PRF better than PRP for hair loss?
Early evidence slightly favours PRF, but it is not clear-cut. In one randomised trial in women, injectable PRF increased hair count by about 26.5 per cent versus about 14.5 per cent for PRP, with fewer side effects, which fits the theory that PRF’s slower, sustained release of growth factors may work better. However, that was a small, single study, and the overall evidence for both is modest and variable. PRP has the longer track record. So PRF is a promising refinement rather than a proven winner.
What is the difference between PRP and PRF?
Both are made from your own blood and injected into the scalp, but they are prepared differently. PRP uses an anticoagulant and a faster spin, stays liquid, and releases its growth factors quickly. PRF is made without an anticoagulant at a lower speed, sets into a fibrin mesh that releases growth factors slowly, and captures more of the blood’s white cells and other components. PRF is essentially a newer, second-generation version of PRP.
Do PRP or PRF regrow hair on a bald scalp?
No. Both work by stimulating follicles that are still present but underperforming, so they can thicken thinning areas but cannot grow hair where the follicles have already been lost. Neither will restore a bald or fully receded area; for that, a hair transplant is the only option that adds hair to bare scalp. PRP and PRF are best used for early or diffuse thinning, or as a support around other treatments, rather than as a cure for baldness.
How many sessions of PRP or PRF do you need?
Both are given as an initial course of several sessions spaced a few weeks apart, followed by maintenance top-ups over time, because the effect fades without them. The exact schedule varies by clinic and by person. This ongoing commitment, in time and cost, is one of the main practical things to weigh up with either treatment, and a clinician can set out a realistic plan.
Get back to Great Hair
in 3 Easy Steps:
01
Arrange Free Consultation
Speak to one of our specialist consultants for expert advice on our range of different hair loss treatments
02
Book Your Procedure
Place a deposit to reserve a time slot at one of the My Hair UK clinics across the UK
03
Attend Your Surgery
Arrive on the day and our specialist surgical team will look after your every need
What People Say About Us
Read our independent My Hair UK Reviews on Reviews.io
The Surgical Team
The surgical team is what makes the difference on the day. The clinics’ five surgeons are all GMC-registered, with a minimum of 1,000 FUE hair transplant procedures each to their name. Between them the team handles complex cases, including Afro-textured and women’s hair transplants, hairline design and lowering, and revision work.
Manchester clinic
• Dr Khawaja Masood Munir: GMC 6122581.
8+ years’ experience, 1,400+ hair transplant surgeries.
• Dr Haider Gillani: GMC 8030796.
1,000+ procedures, with specific expertise in complex cases requiring detailed anatomical understanding.
London (Harrow) clinic
• Dr Mahdi Alosert: GMC 6168297.
20+ years’ clinical experience. Specialist in Afro-Caribbean hair and hairline lowering.
• Dr Shuaib Mir: GMC 7567898.
1,200+ hair transplant cases. BAAPS plastic surgery and RCS anatomy training.
• Dr Zakar Rafiq: GMC 6164032.
MBBS and BSc (Hons) from Imperial College London. Associate Member of the International Society of Hair Restoration Surgery (ISHRS).
You can meet the surgeon who will perform your procedure at your free consultation.