SVF
Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceSystematic Review

Regenerative medicine in the treatment of specific dermatologic disorders: a systematic review of randomized controlled clinical trials.

Jafarzadeh A., Pour Mohammad A., Keramati H., Zeinali R., Khosravi M., Goodarzi A.

Systematic Review with a reported sample of 2888 on Chronic Wound, Scar, Hair Loss, published in Stem Cell Res Ther (2024) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Systematic Review
Journal
Stem Cell Res Ther (2024)
Country
England
Reported sample size
2888
PMID
38886861
DOI
10.1186/s13287-024-03800-6

Abstract (original English)

The aim of this study is to systematically review randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) studying various types of regenerative medicine methods (such as platelet-rich plasma, stromal vascular fraction, cell therapy, conditioned media, etc.) in treating specific dermatologic diseases. Rejuvenation, scarring, wound healing, and other secondary conditions of skin damage were not investigated in this study. Major databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, were meticulously searched for RCTs up to January 2024, focusing on regenerative medicine interventions for specific dermatologic disorders (such as androgenetic alopecia, vitiligo, alopecia areata, etc.). Key data extracted encompassed participant characteristics and sample sizes, types of regenerative therapy, treatment efficacy, and adverse events. In this systematic review, 64 studies involving a total of 2888 patients were examined. Women constituted 44.8% of the study population, while men made up 55.2% of the participants, with an average age of 27.64 years. The most frequently studied skin diseases were androgenetic alopecia (AGA) (45.3%) and vitiligo (31.2%). The most common regenerative methods investigated for these diseases were PRP and the transplantation of autologous epidermal melanocyte/keratinocyte cells, respectively. Studies reported up to 68.4% improvement in AGA and up to 71% improvement i

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

How we grade evidence
AdultFemaleHumansMalePlatelet-Rich PlasmaRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRegenerative MedicineSkin Diseases
Hair & ScalpSystemic / IVChronic WoundScarHair Loss
View on PubMedDOI

Related research