Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceSystematic Review

Systematic review: Impact of stem cells-based therapy, and platelet-rich plasma in hair loss and telogen effluvium related to COVID-19.

Gentile P., Garcovich S.

Systematic Review with a reported sample of 3 on Hair Loss, published in Regen Ther (2023) — 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
Regen Ther (2023)
Country
Netherlands
Reported sample size
3
PMID
37519906
DOI
10.1016/j.reth.2023.07.001

Abstract (original English)

The incidence of hair loss (HL) and telogen effluvium (TE) in COVID-19 patients has been reported in several studies. Evaluate both the increased incidence of HL and TE in COVID-19 and the effectiveness of Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP), Adipose-derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells (AD-MSCs), and Human Follicle Stem Cells (HFSCs) in these patients. The protocol was developed by the Preferred Reporting for Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines. A multistep search of PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Clinicaltrials. gov, Scopus, and Cochrane databases has been performed to identify papers focusing on HL and TE COVID-19 related, and papers focusing on AD-MSCs, HFSC, and PRP use. Of the 404 articles initially identified focusing on HL and TE, 44 were related to COVID-19, and finally, only 6 were analyzed. On the other way, 331 articles focusing on AD-MSCs, HFSC, and PRP were initially identified. Of these, only 6 articles PRP (n = 3), AD-MSCs, and HFSCs (n = 3) have been analyzed. Collected data confirmed both an increased incidence of HL and TE in COVID-19 patients, preliminarily, the related effectiveness of AD-MSCs, HFSCs, and PRP without major side effects.

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

Related research