ReviewCureus2025
Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma as an Adjunct to Hair Transplantation: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Evaluating the Effectiveness of Commercial Oral Supplements for Hair Growth: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2026Pooled it
- Adjunctive regenerative therapies in hair transplantation: a comprehensive review of platelet-rich plasma, exosomes, and emerging methods.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hair transplantation is a well-established treatment for androgenetic alopecia (AGA), yet the long-term success of grafts can vary due to multiple influencing factors. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has gained attention as a potential adjunctive therapy aimed at enhancing graft survival and promoting hair regrowth. This systematic review evaluated the clinical efficacy of PRP when used alongside hair transplantation. A comprehensive search of Scopus, MEDLINE (via PubMed), and DOAJ was conducted from database inception to June 2025. Eligible studies were prospective clinical trials with control groups that investigated the use of PRP in patients undergoing hair transplantation. Three studies, including two randomized controlled trials and one non-randomized controlled study, met the inclusion criteria, encompassing a total of 217 participants. Across all studies, the addition of PRP was associated with improved outcomes, including increased hair density, enhanced follicle survival, and earlier initiation of hair growth. However, notable heterogeneity was observed in PRP preparation methods, treatment protocols, and outcome measures. Furthermore, none of the studies employed standardized evaluation tools or trichoscopic analysis, limiting the consistency and comparability of findings. While the current evidence suggests that PRP may offer clinical benefits as an adjunct to hair transplantation, further high-quality randomized trials with standardized protocols and long-term follow-up are needed to establish its therapeutic role with greater confidence.
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.