ReviewFrontiers in medicine2026
Adjunctive regenerative therapies in hair transplantation: a comprehensive review of platelet-rich plasma, exosomes, and emerging methods.
Review in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Adjunctive regenerative therapies are increasingly used to improve outcomes in hair transplantation; however, evidence remains heterogeneously and variably reported. Objective: To provide a structured, evidence-based narrative review of platelet-rich plasma (PRP), extracellular vesicles/exosomes, and emerging adjunctive therapies in the context of hair transplantation. Methods: A structured literature search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases from database inception to February 2025. English-language studies evaluating regenerative therapies in hair loss and hair transplantation were included. Study selection followed predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, and evidence was synthesized narratively, with emphasis on study design, sample size, quantitative results, and methodological limitations. Results: PRP shows moderate to strong evidence in androgenetic alopecia; increases in hair density of approximately 10-30 hairs/cm Conclusion: PRP represents the most evidence-supported adjuvant therapy in hair transplantation, while exosome-based and emerging regenerative approaches are under investigation. Standardization of protocols, quantitative outcome reporting, and transplantation-specific endpoints are necessary to improve clinical translation and quality of evidence.
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.