Was ist tatsächlich über den weiblichen Körper nach vierzig bewiesen

Haare und Nägel

The Physician's Guide to Platelet-Rich Plasma in Dermatologic Surgery Part I: Definitions, Mechanisms of Action, and Technical Specifications.

5 Wiederholte Evidenz

Wie schwer dies wiegt: mehrere Studien an Menschen, kombiniert — die stärkste verfügbare Evidenz.
Art der Studie
Metaanalyse oder systematischer Review
Untersucht bei
Menschen
Teilnehmer
nicht in der Zusammenfassung angegeben
Veröffentlicht
2020 in Dermatologic surgery : official publication for American Society for Dermatologic Surgery [et al.]
Zitiert
9 mal von anderen Forschungen zitiert
Wer bezahlte
Nicht angegeben. PubMed enthält für die meisten Artikel keine Interessenkonflikt-Erklärung; das ist nicht dasselbe wie unabhängig.
Quelle
PubMed 31714381 · doi 10.1097/DSS.0000000000002147
Die verständliche Zusammenfassung dieser Studie wird noch verfasst. Nachstehend finden Sie das Abstract genau wie von den Forschern veröffentlicht.
Abstract der Forscher — Originaltext

BACKGROUND: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is an increasingly popular treatment modality for various dermatologic conditions, but there are limitations in both the published literature and clinician knowledge. OBJECTIVE: To create a high-yield, in-depth analysis of PRP in procedural dermatology by reviewing available data on its role in hair restoration, soft-tissue remodeling, resurfacing, and rejuvenation; identifying practice gaps and controversies; and making suggestions for future research that will establish dermatologists as pioneers of regenerative medicine. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 2-part systematic review and expert analysis of publications before October 2018. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Most studies on PRP report favorable outcomes with the strongest level of evidence existing for androgenetic alopecia followed by postprocedure wound healing, scar revision, striae, rejuvenation, and dermal filling. There is a dearth of large randomized controlled trials, considerable heterogeneity in the variables studied, and lack of specificity in the preparatory protocols, which may influence clinical outcomes. Future investigations should use consistent nomenclature, find ideal solution parameters for each cutaneous indication, determine significant outcome metrics, and follow double-blinded, randomized, controlled methodologies. Addressing these deficiencies will take sound scientific inquiry but ultimately has the potential to benefit the authors' specialty greatly.