Usefulness of home‐use microneedle devices in the treatment of pattern hair loss

Abstract

Background Microneedle devices have been used to reduce scarring and wrinkling as well as for the treatment of pattern hair loss. Aims Here, we investigated the efficacy and safety of a newly developed home‐use microneedle device for the treatment of pattern hair loss. Methods Twenty‐nine patients were assigned into three groups based on block randomization: home‐use microneedle device only, a combination of home‐use microneedle device and 5% minoxidil solution and 5% minoxidil topical solution only. Each treatment was performed twice a week. The study outcomes included hair counts, patient self‐assessments, and adverse events at baseline and at 6 months. Statistical analyses were performed using analysis of variance (ANOVA), repeated measures ANOVA and Kruskal‐Wallis test. Results The improvements in hair count were seen in the combination group at month 6, but the differences observed did not reach statistical significance in each group and among the three groups. The patient self‐assessment showed the highest score in the combination group, but it did not reveal a statistically significant difference among the three groups. Mild and transient pruritus were reported by one patient who was using the microneedle device only. Conclusions Our study shows that the home‐use microneedle device may be a safe and 5% minoxidil solution penetration‐enhancing therapeutic modality for stimulating hair growth.

Microneedling for Hair Loss

“…The quantitative analyses were performed using the data extracted from 9 controlled trials. 28,[34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41] The characteristics of the 9 studies are included in Table 2. 28,[34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41] For each of the nine trials, within-study risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using Cochrane Collaboration's RoB tool.…”

“…28,[34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41] The characteristics of the 9 studies are included in Table 2. 28,[34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41] For each of the nine trials, within-study risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using Cochrane Collaboration's RoB tool. 42 As per this tool, six domains are given one of three qualitative judgements: the (1) randomization procedure, (2) concealment of allocation, (3) blinding of subjects and research staff, (4) blinding of outcome evaluator, (5) level of attrition bias, and (6) level of selective reporting are the six domains that can be judged to have either "low," "unclear," or "high" RoB.…”

Microneedling and Its Use in Hair Loss Disorders: A Systematic Review

“…[ 12 ] n = 126 (46 m, 80 f); AGA Combination: PRP, 5% minoxidil, 2.50 mg finasteride (men), 200 mg spironolactone (women) Group 1: medications + PRP injections Group 2: medications + MN + topical PRP Group 3: medications MN automated pen, 2.00 mm needles, session endpoints marked as three passes followed by PRP application 6, once every month 6 months Hair counts, hair diameters, photographic evaluation Yes, in both sexes Hair density increased in group 2 versus group 1; larger effect for groups 1 and 2 versus group 3 No serious events reported Twenty-three subjects reported transient pain after PRP 2 Sohng et al. [ 13 ] n = 29 (24 m, 5 f); AGA Combination: 5% minoxidil Group 1: home-use MN Group 2: home-use MN + 5% minoxidil Group 3: 5% minoxidil MN stamp, 0.25 mm spiral needles, endpoint sessions marked as gentle tapping 20 times in target area 52, twice weekly 6 months Hair counts, self assessments No No serious events reported; mild and transient pruritus noted in one subject 2 Burns et al. [ 14 ] n = 11 (f); AGA Combination: 5% minoxidil + MN added to ongoing hair loss treatments 5% minoxidil + MN twice per month added to ongoing hair loss treatments MN automated pen, session endpoints marked as two passes across the frontal, crown, vertex, and upper-parietal scalp 6, twice every month 3 months Photographic evaluation, self assessments Yes Investigators noted that 11/11 subjects improved at least 1–1.5 Sinclair scores No serious events reported 1 Gowda et al.…”

“…Of the seven studies testing MN with 5% minoxidil, six found statistically significantly increased hair counts versus 5% minoxidil alone, and for a range of devices and needle lengths: rollers, automated pens, and fractional radiofrequency devices with depths from 0.60 to 2.50 mm [11,15,18,19,21,23,25]. However, Sohng et al tested 5% minoxidil with a 0.25 mm needling stamp twice-weekly and found no effect on hair parameters [13]. When comparing 5% minoxidil with 0.60 mm or 1.20 mm needle lengths, Faghihi et al found that 0.60 mm needle lengths led to significant hair count and diameter increases versus 5% minoxidil, whereas 1.20 mm needle lengths only saw hair count increases versus 5% minoxidil [21].…”

Estudo do padrão de melhora da alopecia androgenética em pacientes com uso de microagulhamento associado a minoxidil e/ou plasma rico em plaquetas e mesoterapia / Study of the pattern of improvement in androgenetic alopecia in patients using microneedling associated with minoxidil and/or platelet-rich plasma and mesotherapy

“…No lado onde houve a terapia combinada, o estudo refere que a densidade dos cabelos pelo tricoscópio foi significativamente aumentada em relação ao lado da monoterapia Sohng et al (28) -Amostra: 29 pacientes (sexos masculino e feminino) -Tempo de pesquisa: 6 meses -Metodologia: foram divididos em 3 grupos para uso dos procedimentos em domicílio: grupo 1 apenas minoxidil; segundo grupo uso de minoxidil e microagulhamento; terceiro grupo apenas microagulhamento…”