PRP for Alopecia: Cruciani 2023 Systematic Review Research Summary
This is a plain-language summary of the original published research. We do not add conclusions or opinions of our own. This is not medical advice — consult a certified healthcare practitioner before making any decision.
Original research published in Blood Transfusion, 2023
PRP for Alopecia
Study conclusion
Systematic review and meta-analysis of 27 articles found limited evidence for PRP in alopecia. Evidence was rated mostly low quality. Positive effects on hair density were found for pattern hair loss, but evidence for immune-related patchy hair loss (alopecia areata) was unclear.
Strength of evidence
This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of 27 articles. The score is limited because evidence quality was rated as mostly low, study designs were heterogeneous, and PRP preparation protocols varied substantially. The authors' own assessment was that evidence is limited.
Who it applies to
Who was studied
Adults with pattern hair loss and alopecia areata. 27 articles included. Various PRP preparation and administration protocols.
Who was NOT studied
Children. People with scarring or other types of alopecia. Standardised PRP protocols.
What to look for when shopping
PRP is a clinic-based procedure with no standardised protocol. PRP is not FDA-approved for hair loss.
What research cannot help you decide
Whether PRP works for immune-related patchy hair loss. Which PRP protocol produces the most reliable results.
Key findings
- Positive effects on hair density were found for pattern hair loss
- Evidence for alopecia areata was unclear — results were inconsistent across studies
- Most included evidence was rated as low quality
- High heterogeneity across studies due to different PRP protocols
- PRP is not FDA-approved for hair loss
What they did
Researchers searched multiple databases for studies of PRP for alopecia. 27 articles were included. Hair density was the primary outcome. Evidence quality was assessed and results combined statistically where possible.
What they found
| Comparison | Result | Significant? |
|---|---|---|
| PRP — pattern hair loss hair density | Positive effect found | Yes |
| PRP — alopecia areata | Evidence unclear — inconsistent across studies | No |
| PRP evidence quality overall | Mostly low quality | No |
What this study does not show
- 1.Whether PRP works for alopecia areata — evidence was inconclusive.
- 2.Which PRP preparation protocol is most effective.
- 3.Long-term outcomes beyond trial periods.
Limitations
- 1.Evidence quality was mostly low
- 2.27 articles is a moderate-sized review but heterogeneity was high
- 3.PRP preparation protocols varied substantially
- 4.PRP is not FDA-approved for hair loss
Who funded it
No funding source declared. No conflicts of interest reported.
Used in these articles
Links added as fact-checks and articles citing this study are published.