Therapeutic effect of microneedling and autologous platelet‐rich plasma in the treatment of atrophic scars: A randomized study

Ibrahim, Zeinab A; El-Ashmawy, Amal Ahmad; Shora, Ola A El

doi:10.1111/jocd.12356

Cited by 69 publications

(81 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These studies report 57 participants with Fitzpatrick type 5 skin, 138 with type 4, 78 with type 3 and 34 with type 2. The differences between the groups were not significant, with the exception of Ibrahim ZA and co‐authors having a significantly greater amount of skin type 4 in his control group (OR 0.27; CI: 0.08‐0.88) …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…One study (56 participants) reported the degree of pain after either combined or monotherapy. Ibrahim ZA and co‐authors found no differences in the degree of pain experienced between microneedling with PRP and microneedling alone (MD −0.10, [−0.50, 0.30]; P = .64) …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Initial scar severity of whole‐face studies was of particular interest because of the presence of variance unseen in the split‐face studies. Ibrahim ZA and co‐authors had a treatment group with a combination of alternating PRP and microneedling with a significantly lower initial scar severity score (MD −0.56, [−0.91, −0.21] P = .002) …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Platelet‐rich plasma in noninvasive procedures for atrophic acne scars: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Long

Gupta

et al. 2020

J of Cosmetic Dermatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The use of platelet‐rich plasma (PRP) combined with noninvasive, nonenergy procedures for atrophic acne scars has shown promise. To date, there has not been a systematic review or meta‐analysis of the effectiveness of this therapy. Aims To use meta‐analysis to compare Goodman and Baron qualitative scores, patient satisfaction outcomes, and adverse effects in patients undergoing combination procedures with PRP, combination procedures without PRP, and noninvasive monotherapy without PRP in the treatment of patients with atrophic acne scars. Patients/Methods The Pubmed and Cochrane library databases were searched for relevant studies published before May 1, 2019. PRISMA guidelines were utilized. Studies that compared the use of PRP in combination with a noninvasive procedure and therapies without PRP for the treatment of atrophic acne scars were included. Cochrane's handbook was utilized to assess the individual biases of the included studies. Publication bias was assessed. Results A total of 311 participants (153 whole‐face participants and 158 split‐face participants) were reviewed across eight included studies. Quantitative analysis of 241 participants across six included studies showed a statistically significant reduction in scar severity scores in favor of microneedling or subcision with PRP (P < .001). Combination therapy with intradermal or topical PRP was significantly more effective than monotherapy alone and combination therapy with an adjunct other than PRP (P < .001 and .001, respectively). Conclusion This systematic review and meta‐analysis demonstrated that microneedling or subcision with PRP produced statistically significant improvement in validated outcomes over microneedling or subcision alone.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 80%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Platelet‐rich plasma in noninvasive procedures for atrophic acne scars: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Long

Gupta

et al. 2020

J of Cosmetic Dermatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The severity of acne scars has reduced after treatment with dermapen in most of the patients of group I, two patients had no improvement with dermapen, and this might be due to long duration of scar. In parallel with this study, Ibrahim et al used dermapen for treatment of atrophic scars. They conducted a study in which all patients in the dermapen group showed improvement; better response was observed in non‐acne scars than acne scars, although the difference was statistically insignificant.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…Group I: We primed the patients with topical vitamin A and C formulations twice a day for 2 weeks to maximize dermal collagen formation. We adapted the technique described by Ibrahim et al Microneedling treatment was performed with dermapen (Bomtech Electronics, Seoul, Seocho‐Gu, Korea (34, Hyoryeong‐ro 49‐gil, Seocho‐gu, Seoul, JX‐120DR). Thick layer of local anesthetic EMLA cream (eutectic mixture of lidocaine and prilocaine), APP Pharmaceuticals, Fresenius Kabi, San Francisco, IL, USA) was applied to the face for approximately 45‐60 minutes before the procedure.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microneedling by dermapen and glycolic acid peel for the treatment of acne scars: Comparative study

Saadawi

Esawy

Kandeel

et al. 2018

J of Cosmetic Dermatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Background Many methods have been performed to achieve a satisfying outcome in acne scars but some of them were high cost and also were associated with low results and some complications. Objectives To evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety therapy of glycolic acid (GA) peel, microneedling with dermapen and a combination of both procedures in treatment of atrophic acne scars. Patents and methods This study was conducted on 30 patients suffering from acne scars. They were randomly assigned into three groups, each group included 10 patients; group I was treated with GA peel, group II treated was with microneedling. Group III received a combination of both procedures. All patients received six sessions with 2‐week intervals. The clinical assessment was based on the qualitative global scar grading system before and after treatment, quartile grading scale, and degree of patient satisfaction. Results There was a statistically significant decrease in acne scars grade after treatment among the studied groups (P = 0.04) but it was higher in group III. There was improvement in boxcar, ice pick, and rolling scars in all groups, respectively (P = 0.03, P = 0.04, P = 0.04). Patients' satisfaction was higher in group III (P = 0.04). Conclusion The combination of dermapen and GA peel is more effective than monotherapy.

show abstract

Platelet‐rich plasma in the treatment of scars, to suggest or not to suggest? A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Ebrahimi

Alimohamadi

Janani

et al. 2022

J Tissue Eng Regen Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the rising trend for applying platelet‐rich plasma (PRP) in the management of various types of scars, there is no convincing evidence supporting its use. This motivated us to review the randomized clinical trials that examine the effectiveness and safety of PRP, alone or in combination with other methods, for the management of atrophic or hypertrophic/keloidal scars. The Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched until September 1st, 2020. Thirteen clinical trials were enrolled in the meta‐analysis, and 10 more were reviewed for their results. The random effect meta‐analysis method was used to assess the effect size of each outcome for each treatment type, and I2 was used to calculate the statistical heterogeneity between the studies. Patients treated with PRP experienced an overall response rate of 23%, comparable to the results seen with laser or micro‐needling (22% and 23%, respectively) When used alone, moderate improvement was the most frequently observed degree of response with PRP (36%) whereas, when added to laser or micro‐needling, most patients experienced marked (33%, 43%, respectively) or excellent (32% and 23%, respectively) results. Concerning the hypertrophic/keloid scars, the only study meeting the required criteria reported a better improvement and fewer adverse effects when PRP was added to the intralesional corticosteroids. Platelet‐rich plasma appears to be a safe and effective treatment for various types of atrophic scars. In addition, when added to ablative lasers or micro‐needling, it seems to considerably add to the efficacy of treatment and reduce the side effects.

show abstract

Therapeutic effect of microneedling and autologous platelet‐rich plasma in the treatment of atrophic scars: A randomized study

Abstract: Although a single treatment may give good results, combination between skin needling and platelet-rich plasma is more effective, safe with less number of sessions in all types of atrophic scars.

Cited by 69 publications

References 35 publications

Platelet‐rich plasma in noninvasive procedures for atrophic acne scars: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Platelet‐rich plasma in noninvasive procedures for atrophic acne scars: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Microneedling by dermapen and glycolic acid peel for the treatment of acne scars: Comparative study

Platelet‐rich plasma in the treatment of scars, to suggest or not to suggest? A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About