Abstract： Objective:To investigate whether platelet-rich plasma (PRP) or platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) is more effective as a scaffold for pulp revascularization compared with conventional blood clot (BC) .Methods:Literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and Wanfang databases up to August 2020. A Meta analysis of included studies on the clinical cure rate, root length, root canal wall thickness and efficacy of root apical sealing was carried out by RevMan 5.3 and stata 13.0 software.Results:There was no difference in clinical cure rate and apical sealing rate between PRP, PRF and BC used for dental pulp revascularization. Compared with BC, the relative risk ( RR) of clinical cure rate of PRP and PRF was 0.99 (0.87, 1.12) , 95% confidence interval ( CI) : 0.95 (0.86, 1.04) , and the RR of apical sealing of PRP and PRF was 1.09 (0.91, 1.30) , 95% CI: 1.02 (0.83, 1.25) . Analysis on the increase rate in root length or root canal wall thickness did not show difference between PRP, PRF and BC. Compared with BC, the RR (95% CI) of root length increase rate of PRP and PRF were 1.06 (0.86, 1.32) and 1.10 (0.90, 1.35) , respectively, and the RR (95% CI) of root canal wall thickness increase rate were 1.04 (0.86, 1.26) and 1.09 (0.76, 1.57) , respectively. Analysis on the increase magnitude in root length showed that PRP was better than BC, with the weighted mean difference ( WMD) (95% CI) being 1.47 (0.57, 2.36) mm. Conclusion:There is no significant difference in the clinical cure rate, increase rates of root length or root canal wall thickness, and root apical closure rate between the use of PRP, PRF and conventional BC as a scaffold for pulp revascularization. However, proper use of PRP or PRF as scaffold materials can increase the magnitude of increase in root length to a certain extent.