Side-by-side comparison
| PRP | Exosomes | |
|---|---|---|
| Source | Autologous (your own blood) | Allogeneic (donor stem cell-derived) |
| Active components | Platelets, growth factors | Vesicles carrying proteins, RNA, lipids |
| FDA status | Generally accepted as autologous biologic | Not FDA-approved; under enforcement |
| Evidence | Multiple RCTs (knee OA, hair, tendons) | Mostly preclinical and small case series |
| Common uses | Joint, tendon, hair restoration, wound | Joint, hair, aesthetic; not yet evidence-validated |
| Genesis grade | Moderate evidence | Weak evidence; regulatory caution |
| Cost (national) | Mid range | High range |
When PRP makes more sense
PRP is the better-supported choice for most musculoskeletal indications, especially knee osteoarthritis and certain tendinopathies. The evidence base is much larger, the regulatory standing is clearer, and the autologous source profile is straightforward.
When patients choose exosomes anyway
Some patients are drawn to the theoretical promise of exosomes for systemic regenerative effects. We acknowledge this interest, share the evidence honestly (weak), and discuss the regulatory landscape openly. We do not refuse care, and we do not pretend the science is stronger than it is.