ArticleCureus2024
Comparison of Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma With and Without Topical Minoxidil for Hair Growth in Patients With Androgenetic Alopecia: A Prospective Study.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Promises and Pitfalls of Regenerative Therapies for Androgenetic Alopecia: Platelet-Rich Plasma, Photobiomodulation, Stem Cells, and Exosomes.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Androgenetic pattern of alopecia is a common problem occurring in men, which mostly arises from their younger age. There are many therapies advocated in the literature for hair loss reduction, and one of them is platelet-rich plasma (PRP) therapy. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of combined PRP therapy with topical minoxidil over PRP as monotherapy in hair loss reduction and regeneration of new hair. Materials and methods The study was conducted at our institute in the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery at Saveetha Dental College and Hospital. The study consisted of 40 participants, 20 of whom had only PRP therapy as part of their treatment, while the other 20 participants received PRP combined with topical minoxidil as treatment. Both group participants were evaluated for postoperative hair shaft diameter and hair follicle density. Parameters were measured preoperatively and postoperatively after one month, two months, and three months. Data analysis was done with the help of SPSS, with P-values less than 0.05 considered statistically significant. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the two groups for measurement of hair shaft diameter, and for comparison between hair follicle density, an unpaired t-test was used. Results It was found that the mean hair shaft diameter in the PRP with minoxidil group was higher than that of the PRP group for one month (P = 0.023), two months (P = 0.001), and three months (P = 0.001) postoperative periods, and the results were statistically significant. Hair follicle density (mean hair quantity) was higher in the PRP group than in the PRP with the minoxidil group in the first postoperative month. However, this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.08). While the mean hair quantity in the PRP with minoxidil group was higher than that in the PRP group for two months (P = 0.45) and three months (P = 0.001) postoperative periods, the results were statistically significant only at the three-month postoperative period. Conclusion It can be concluded that injectable autologous PRP with minoxidil as a topical agent is a better treatment option for the improvement of both hair quality (hair shaft diameter) and hair quantity (hair follicle density) compared to plain autologous injectable PRP monotherapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.