富血小板血浆治疗脱发:临床证据的系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 4.2 3区 医学 Q1 DERMATOLOGY
Eduardo Anitua, Roberto Tierno, Mohammad Hamdan Alkhraisat
{"title":"富血小板血浆治疗脱发:临床证据的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Eduardo Anitua, Roberto Tierno, Mohammad Hamdan Alkhraisat","doi":"10.1007/s13555-025-01542-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Alopecia is a common hair loss condition with different treatment modalities. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP), a minimally invasive autologous therapy, has emerged as a topic of interest, but its effectiveness remains debated. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of PRP for alopecia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus conducted on 27 May 2025 with monthly updates until July 10 2025 identified 43 randomized controlled trials (1877 participants) assessing PRP in alopecia. Primary outcomes were changes in hair density and thickness. Secondary outcomes included side effects, hair loss, clinical improvement, patient satisfaction, recurrence, and other hair follicle metrics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Activated PRP was effective in increasing hair density and minimizing recurrence compared with placebo, whereas non-activated PRP was associated with a higher frequency of adverse effects. PRP also improved clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction. Moreover, hair loss decreased with PRP therapy regardless of activation status or control type. However, PRP did not significantly affect hair thickness. However, PRP did not significantly affect hair thickness.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>These findings support PRP as a relatively safe and effective therapy for alopecia, particularly in increasing hair density and reducing hair loss. Patient satisfaction was generally favorable. The clinical efficacy of PRP was often comparable or superior to conventional treatments. Activation status appears to influence response, highlighting the importance of preparation protocols. However, as a result of heterogeneity in study designs and incomplete reporting of the effect of specific PRP composition-related covariates on treatment efficacy or patient safety outcomes, no significant variation in overall effect modification was attributable to alopecia subtype.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Moderate evidence highlights that PRP is safe and effective in improving hair density, reducing hair loss, and enhancing clinical outcomes and satisfaction. No significant benefits were demonstrated for hair thickness or other follicle-related parameters as derived from PRP therapy. Further high-quality, standardized trials are needed to confirm these findings and clarify the clinical significance of PRP formulations.</p>","PeriodicalId":11186,"journal":{"name":"Dermatology and Therapy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Management of Alopecia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Evidence.\",\"authors\":\"Eduardo Anitua, Roberto Tierno, Mohammad Hamdan Alkhraisat\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s13555-025-01542-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Alopecia is a common hair loss condition with different treatment modalities. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP), a minimally invasive autologous therapy, has emerged as a topic of interest, but its effectiveness remains debated. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of PRP for alopecia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus conducted on 27 May 2025 with monthly updates until July 10 2025 identified 43 randomized controlled trials (1877 participants) assessing PRP in alopecia. Primary outcomes were changes in hair density and thickness. Secondary outcomes included side effects, hair loss, clinical improvement, patient satisfaction, recurrence, and other hair follicle metrics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Activated PRP was effective in increasing hair density and minimizing recurrence compared with placebo, whereas non-activated PRP was associated with a higher frequency of adverse effects. PRP also improved clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction. Moreover, hair loss decreased with PRP therapy regardless of activation status or control type. However, PRP did not significantly affect hair thickness. However, PRP did not significantly affect hair thickness.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>These findings support PRP as a relatively safe and effective therapy for alopecia, particularly in increasing hair density and reducing hair loss. Patient satisfaction was generally favorable. The clinical efficacy of PRP was often comparable or superior to conventional treatments. Activation status appears to influence response, highlighting the importance of preparation protocols. However, as a result of heterogeneity in study designs and incomplete reporting of the effect of specific PRP composition-related covariates on treatment efficacy or patient safety outcomes, no significant variation in overall effect modification was attributable to alopecia subtype.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Moderate evidence highlights that PRP is safe and effective in improving hair density, reducing hair loss, and enhancing clinical outcomes and satisfaction. No significant benefits were demonstrated for hair thickness or other follicle-related parameters as derived from PRP therapy. Further high-quality, standardized trials are needed to confirm these findings and clarify the clinical significance of PRP formulations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11186,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dermatology and Therapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dermatology and Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13555-025-01542-8\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DERMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dermatology and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13555-025-01542-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:脱发是一种常见的脱发状况,有不同的治疗方法。富血小板血浆(PRP)是一种微创自体疗法,已成为人们感兴趣的话题,但其有效性仍存在争议。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在评价PRP治疗脱发的安全性和有效性。方法:综合检索PubMed、EMBASE和Scopus,检索时间为2025年5月27日,每月更新一次,截止到2025年7月10日,检索了43项随机对照试验(1877名受试者),评估脱发的PRP。主要结局是毛发密度和厚度的变化。次要结局包括副作用、脱发、临床改善、患者满意度、复发和其他毛囊指标。结果:与安慰剂相比,激活的PRP在增加头发密度和减少复发方面有效,而非激活的PRP与更高频率的不良反应相关。PRP还改善了临床结果和患者满意度。此外,无论激活状态或对照类型如何,PRP治疗均可减少脱发。然而,PRP对毛发厚度没有显著影响。然而,PRP对毛发厚度没有显著影响。讨论:这些发现支持PRP作为一种相对安全有效的脱发治疗方法,特别是在增加头发密度和减少脱发方面。患者满意度总体良好。PRP的临床疗效通常与常规治疗相当或优于常规治疗。激活状态似乎影响反应,强调了准备方案的重要性。然而,由于研究设计的异质性和特定PRP组成相关协变量对治疗疗效或患者安全结局影响的不完整报道,脱发亚型在总体效果修改方面没有显著变化。结论:中度证据强调PRP在改善头发密度、减少脱发、提高临床结果和满意度方面是安全有效的。PRP治疗对头发厚度或其他毛囊相关参数没有显著的益处。需要进一步的高质量、标准化试验来证实这些发现并阐明PRP配方的临床意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Management of Alopecia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Evidence.

Introduction: Alopecia is a common hair loss condition with different treatment modalities. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP), a minimally invasive autologous therapy, has emerged as a topic of interest, but its effectiveness remains debated. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of PRP for alopecia.

Methods: A comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus conducted on 27 May 2025 with monthly updates until July 10 2025 identified 43 randomized controlled trials (1877 participants) assessing PRP in alopecia. Primary outcomes were changes in hair density and thickness. Secondary outcomes included side effects, hair loss, clinical improvement, patient satisfaction, recurrence, and other hair follicle metrics.

Results: Activated PRP was effective in increasing hair density and minimizing recurrence compared with placebo, whereas non-activated PRP was associated with a higher frequency of adverse effects. PRP also improved clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction. Moreover, hair loss decreased with PRP therapy regardless of activation status or control type. However, PRP did not significantly affect hair thickness. However, PRP did not significantly affect hair thickness.

Discussion: These findings support PRP as a relatively safe and effective therapy for alopecia, particularly in increasing hair density and reducing hair loss. Patient satisfaction was generally favorable. The clinical efficacy of PRP was often comparable or superior to conventional treatments. Activation status appears to influence response, highlighting the importance of preparation protocols. However, as a result of heterogeneity in study designs and incomplete reporting of the effect of specific PRP composition-related covariates on treatment efficacy or patient safety outcomes, no significant variation in overall effect modification was attributable to alopecia subtype.

Conclusions: Moderate evidence highlights that PRP is safe and effective in improving hair density, reducing hair loss, and enhancing clinical outcomes and satisfaction. No significant benefits were demonstrated for hair thickness or other follicle-related parameters as derived from PRP therapy. Further high-quality, standardized trials are needed to confirm these findings and clarify the clinical significance of PRP formulations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Dermatology and Therapy
Dermatology and Therapy Medicine-Dermatology
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
8.80%
发文量
187
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Dermatology and Therapy is an international, open access, peer-reviewed, rapid publication journal (peer review in 2 weeks, published 3–4 weeks from acceptance). The journal is dedicated to the publication of high-quality clinical (all phases), observational, real-world, and health outcomes research around the discovery, development, and use of dermatological therapies. Studies relating to diagnosis, pharmacoeconomics, public health and epidemiology, quality of life, and patient care, management, and education are also encouraged. Areas of focus include, but are not limited to all clinical aspects of dermatology, such as skin pharmacology; skin development and aging; prevention, diagnosis, and management of skin disorders and melanomas; research into dermal structures and pathology; and all areas of aesthetic dermatology, including skin maintenance, dermatological surgery, and lasers. The journal is of interest to a broad audience of pharmaceutical and healthcare professionals and publishes original research, reviews, case reports/case series, trial protocols, and short communications. Dermatology and Therapy will consider all scientifically sound research be it positive, confirmatory or negative data. Submissions are welcomed whether they relate to an International and/or a country-specific audience, something that is crucially important when researchers are trying to target more specific patient populations. This inclusive approach allows the journal to assist in the dissemination of quality research, which may be considered of insufficient interest by other journals. The journal appeals to a global audience and receives submissions from all over the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信