Lu Puyang, Liao Mingyi, Qiu Xiufeng, Xiang Youfu, Xu Youhong, Ye Xiaoying, Zeng Zhaolin, Li Longnian, You Cong
Department of Dermatology and Venereology, First Affiliated Hospital of Gannan Medical University, Ganzhou, Jiangxi, China.
Department of Pharmaceutical Engineering, School of Pharmacy Gannan, Medical University, Ganzhou, Jiangxi, China.
J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2025 Apr 3;27(3):53-63. doi: 10.1080/14764172.2025.2488980. Epub 2025 Apr 7.
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.
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 ( = 20) or microneedle delivery ( = 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.
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 ( > .05). However, the microneedle group reported significantly lower pain levels than the intradermal injection group ( < .001). No adverse events were observed during the treatment period.
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.
本研究比较了两种富血小板血浆(PRP)给药方法治疗雄激素性脱发(AGA)的临床效果:微针给药和皮内注射。该研究还评估了与这两种方法相关的不良反应。
根据特定的纳入和排除标准选择了20例AGA患者。每位患者的头皮沿中线分为两个治疗区域,每个区域随机分配接受PRP治疗,其中一组通过皮内注射(n = 20),另一组通过微针给药(n = 20)。治疗包括三个疗程,间隔1个月。在第一个疗程前和最后一个疗程后6个月拍摄头皮照片并进行毛囊镜测量。在最后一次治疗后6个月,使用全球美学改善量表和自我满意度问卷评估患者的治疗效果。使用数字评分量表测量第一个疗程中的疼痛程度,并在整个研究过程中记录不良反应。
在完成所有治疗6个月后,微针给药组和皮内注射组在头发密度、头发直径、单毛囊比例或毛囊镜检查结果方面均未观察到显著差异(P>0.05)。然而,微针组报告的疼痛程度明显低于皮内注射组(P<0.001)。在治疗期间未观察到不良事件。
PRP微针给药治疗AGA的临床疗效与皮内注射相当,且疼痛程度显著更低。这表明微针给药可能是AGA治疗的一种有前景的替代方法。