Tejapira K, Yongpisarn T, Sakpuwadol N, Suchonwanit P. Platelet-rich plasma in alopecia areata and primary cicatricial alopecias: A systematic review.
Front Med (Lausanne) 2022;
9:1058431. [PMID:
36507528 PMCID:
PMC9731377 DOI:
10.3389/fmed.2022.1058431]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/07/2022] [Accepted: 11/08/2022] [Indexed: 11/27/2022] Open
Abstract
Background
Immune-mediated alopecias (IMAs), a group of hair disorders associated with immunological reactions, remain a therapeutic challenge since available treatments are generally unfavorable with potential side effects. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has been recently proposed as a treatment option based on several limited-quality studies; however, there is no systematic evaluation of PRP efficacy on IMAs in the literature.
Objective
To assess PRP's effects in treating IMAs using a systematic review.
Methods
Electronic searches were conducted using PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases. A search strategy was designed to retrieve all studies exploring PRP in treating IMAs, including alopecia areata (AA) and primary cicatricial alopecias (PCAs). In addition, all randomized and non-randomized studies reporting subjective and/or objective outcomes of alopecia treatment with PRP were included.
Results
Thirty-two studies were included, comprising 621 patients with AA and 19 patients with PCAs. PRP had superior efficacy as monotherapy in five studies, comparable to intralesional corticosteroids in six studies in AA treatment. In addition, in the analysis of PCAs, including lymphocytic and neutrophilic subtypes, PRP was efficacious in alleviating disease progression in nine studies.
Conclusion
PRP is considered a promising treatment for AA and PCAs in patients who experienced unfavorable outcomes from conventional treatment. However, its clinical application remains to be standardized, and its recommendation as a treatment for IMAs could not be ascertained due to a lack of high-quality evidence.
Systematic review registration
[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=353859], identifier [CRD42022353859].
Collapse