Journal of cosmetic and laser therapy : official publication of the European Society for Laser Dermatology · 2025
Platelet-rich plasma for androgenetic alopecia: intradermal injection or microneedle delivery?
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lu Puyang, Liao Mingyi, Qiu Xiufeng, Xiang Youfu, Xu Youhong, Ye Xiaoying, Zeng Zhaolin, Li Longnian, You Cong
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study compared the clinical effectiveness of two methods of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) administration for treating androgenetic alopecia (AGA): microneedle delivery and intradermal injection. The study also evaluated adverse reactions associated with both methods.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty patients with AGA were selected according to specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. The scalp of each patient was divided into two treatment areas along the midline, each randomly assigned to receive PRP either via intradermal injection (n = 20) or microneedle delivery (n = 20). The treatment comprised three sessions spaced 1 month apart. Scalp photographs and trichoscopic measurements were obtained before the first session and 6 month after the final session. Patient outcomes were assessed 6 month after the last treatment using the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale and a self-satisfaction questionnaire. Pain levels during the first session were measured using a Numerical Rating Scale, and adverse reactions were recorded throughout the study.
RESULTS: Six month after completing all treatments, no significant differences were observed between the microneedle delivery and intradermal injection groups for hair density, hair diameter, single hair follicle ratio, or trichoscopic findings (p > .05). However, the microneedle group reported significantly lower pain levels than the intradermal injection group (p < .001). No adverse events were observed during the treatment period.
CONCLUSION: The clinical efficacy of microneedle delivery of PRP was comparable to that of intradermal injection for AGA treatment, with the added benefit of significantly lower pain levels. This suggests that microneedle delivery may be a promising alternative for AGA management.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty patients with AGA were selected according to specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. The scalp of each patient was divided into two treatment areas along the midline, each randomly assigned to receive PRP either via intradermal injection (n = 20) or microneedle delivery (n = 20). The treatment comprised three sessions spaced 1 month apart. Scalp photographs and trichoscopic measurements were obtained before the first session and 6 month after the final session. Patient outcomes were assessed 6 month after the last treatment using the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale and a self-satisfaction questionnaire. Pain levels during the first session were measured using a Numerical Rating Scale, and adverse reactions were recorded throughout the study.
RESULTS: Six month after completing all treatments, no significant differences were observed between the microneedle delivery and intradermal injection groups for hair density, hair diameter, single hair follicle ratio, or trichoscopic findings (p > .05). However, the microneedle group reported significantly lower pain levels than the intradermal injection group (p < .001). No adverse events were observed during the treatment period.
CONCLUSION: The clinical efficacy of microneedle delivery of PRP was comparable to that of intradermal injection for AGA treatment, with the added benefit of significantly lower pain levels. This suggests that microneedle delivery may be a promising alternative for AGA management.