ReviewCureus2026
Efficacy of Exosome-Based Therapies for Skin Rejuvenation: A Systematic Review of Human Studies.
Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Exosomes are secreted tiny organelles that are single-membrane enclosed and can perform a broad spectrum of functions upon release, such as the reorganization of extracellular matrix and communication with other cells through the release of signals and chemicals, which play an important role in development, immunity, tissue homeostasis, cancer, and neurodegenerative diseases, among other aspects of human health and disease. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of exosome-based therapies for skin rejuvenation in human populations and to identify gaps in the existing evidence. A methodological literature search was performed in databases such as PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. Clinical experiments that were conducted on humans to assess exosome-based interventions to rejuvenate the aesthetic skin were encompassed. The process of study selection, data extraction, and quality appraisal was done independently by two reviewers. Synthesis of results was narrative, since there was methodological heterogeneity. A total of 19 studies were included, but most of them were not randomized. There was an association between exosome-based interventions and skin hydration, elasticity, wrinkles, pores, pigmentation, and overall appearance improvement in the short term. The majority of the studies reported a positive safety profile of topical application, with the exception of individual reports of risks with off-label injectable use. Exosome-based therapies showed encouraging early clinical effects of skin rejuvenation, and the existing evidence is marred by heterogeneity and lack of follow-up. Rigorous randomized trials and standardized reporting are required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.