New Study Identifies Key Parameters for PRP Hair Loss
PRP is recognized as a treatment for androgenetic alopecia. The treatment itself is not FDA approved and not regulated by the FDA which means there are many, many protocols. I’d estimate that there are at least 500 different techniques. How best to perform PRP is not clear.
Authors set out to perform a network meta-Analysis and meta-regression study to determine which treatment protocols seem to work best and which are not as good. The authors systematically reviewed the medical literature to obtain relevant studies and then conducted a multivariable meta-regression and network meta-analyses (NMAs).
Twenty-five trials met the author’s eligibility criteria; 10 unique PRP regimens were ultimately used in the calculations. All in all the authors proposed that PRP works better when:
(i) patients have more PRP sessions
(ii) patients come into clinic more often (the time interval between sessions decreases);
3) the practitioner uses chemically-activated PRP (vs inactivated),
4) the practitioner uses a double centrifugation method (vs single),
5) the patient is younger (as opposed to older)
6) the patient is female (as opposed to male)
Conclusion
All in all this is an interesting study. Studies of PRP are generally quite small and generally very poorly designed so one must be careful in considering these as any sort of guideline. Nevertheless, these are helpful results that will fuel further studies.
REFERENCE
Gupta AK and Bamimore M. Platelet-Rich Plasma Monotherapies for Androgenetic Alopecia: A Network Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression Study. J Drugs Dermatol. 2022 Sep 1;21(9):943-952.
