“…In the Materials and Methods section of the abovementioned article, L-PRF is processed at 708 RCF (2,700 RPM in centrifuge, Table 1, Figure 2), which is far above the standard protocol of the original L-PRF (± 408 RCF). 8,9 This higher g-force unfortunately has several negative side effects with significant impact on the outcome of the study: 1) a higher g force will push more cells to the bottom of the tube ( Figure 2) and as such reduces the cellular content in the clot, 10 2) at higher g force the PRF clot becomes poorer in platelets and leukocytes, and as such will release less growth factors, 11,12 and 3) at higher g force, the radial vibration increases exponentially, which has a negative impact on the clot formation and its fibrin network, 5 especially in a T A B L E 1 RCF calculation (minimum: RCF min , average: RCF av , maximum: RCF max , and RCF clot where clot is formed, respectively) for the 2 most frequently used centrifuges for the preparation of PRF: depending on the rotor angulation and the rotations per minute (RPM) device that has already a high vibration by itself, 5 and will definitely lead to cell damage, again leading to a reduced release of growth factors. These aspects might explain why A-PRF (in this paper prepared at 1,300 RPM, Table 1) showed an increase in growth factor release, and superior fibroblast migration, proliferation, and collagen mRNA levels in comparison to a misrepresented specimen of L-PRF ( Figure 2).…”