Background
Hair plays a significant role in shaping the appearance of an individual. Loss of hair can lead to serious effects on social esteem of an individual. The most common cause of hair loss is Androgenetic Alopecia (AGA).This hereditary disorder followed a specific pattern causing progressive thinning of hair in both Men and Women.
Aims
The aim of the current study is to compare and evaluate the efficacy of QR678 therapy versus PRP in the treatment of Male Androgenetic Alopecia. Since QR678 and QR678 Neo have been found to be formulations equivalent in efficacy, the results would be the same with either formulation.
Methods
A prospective, comparative, single‐blind study was carried out with 2 groups of 25 patients each. Intradermal injections of QR678 formulations and PRP were injected in group A and B respectively. Hair pull test, Video microscopic assessment, Global Photographic assessment was done and patient’s subjective assessment was done through questionnaire at the end of the study. Results were evaluated after 6 months and follow up was done till 1 year.
Results
100% reduction in hair fall was noted at the end of 6 months in the QR678 group which was maintained for 1 year. Video microscopic evaluation showed that the hair density, terminal hair density, vellus hair density and shaft diameter were significantly better in QR678 group (P < .005) than the PRP group. Since QR678 and QR678 Neo formulatons are equivalent in efficacy, the results of tthis trial can be attributed to be the same, irrespective of the formulation used.
Conclusion
The bioengineered formulation of QR678 proved to be more beneficial for Male Androgenetic Alopecia (Male pattern hair loss) compared to PRP. A comparative study between QR678 and PRP with long term follow‐up will widen our spectra of knowledge.
Background:
Asian Indians usually have wide lower faces because of masseter hypertrophy. The authors evaluated the efficacy of botulinum toxin type A in long-term management of bilateral masseter hypertrophy in Asian Indian patients.
Methods:
Fifty patients were enrolled in the study and injected with 30 U of botulinum toxin type A to each side of the face, at baseline. Based on masseter muscle thickness and response to the injections, 25 patients underwent a second injection session at week 12, and the other 25 patients underwent additional third sessions, at week 24 after the first injection, respectively. Standardized photography and ultrasonography were performed to assess facial contour and masseter muscle thickness at baseline and at 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-year follow-ups. A p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Results:
The authors observed 12 percent (p < 0.0001) average masseter muscle size reduction at week 12. The maximum reduction (26.6 percent; p < 0.0001) was observed at week 24 for the patients who received two injections and maintained an average 24.43 percent (p < 0.0001) reduction until follow-up at year 4. Patients who received three injections exhibited very high reduction (42.52 percent; p < 0.0001) of masseter volume at week 36 and maintained an average 40.64 percent (p < 0.0001) reduced volume until year 4.
Conclusions:
Botulinum toxin type A treatment is effective for long-term management of bilateral masseter hypertrophy. Doses repeated at 12-week intervals accentuate masseter volume reduction and also help maintain reduced masseter volume for 4-year follow-up, with satisfactory facial contour.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.