No abstract

Background: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is a popular procedure for the treatment of androgenetic alopecia (AGA). Aim:To ascertain the role of minoxidil 5% lotion alone versus minoxidil 5% lotion and PRP versus minoxidil 5% lotion, PRP with microneedling in AGA. Material and methods:Ninety-three AGA patients with Hamilton-Norwood score 1-5 were grouped into three groups A, B, and C. Patients in group A (control group) were treated with minoxidil 5% lotion twice daily (n = 31), whereas patients in group B underwent treatment with minoxidil 5% lotion twice daily and PRP (n = 31), and group C patients received minoxidil 5% lotion twice daily, PRP, and microneedling (n = 31). Baseline and post-treatment photographs were taken along with dermoscopic evaluation. Selection of the dermoscopic variables included in the evaluation process was based on the published literature and dermoscopists' expertise and experience. Hair pull test was performed before and during follow-up.Results: Post-treatment, hair pull test was negative in 27 patients (87.1%, P < 0.01) of group C, 20 patients (64.5%, P < 0.05) of group B, and 15 patients (48.4%) of group A. Hair growth was better appreciated in group C (26/31) compared to groups B (17/31)and A (10/31).The patients' self-satisfaction score on a Likert scale was more than seven (high satisfaction) in 24/31 patients in group C. There was a statistically significant difference between three groups in terms of hair pull test, terminal-to-vellus hair ratio, and patient satisfaction score as determined by oneway ANOVA.Conclusion: PRP with microneedling is better in comparison with PRP alone or minoxidil monotherapy in patients with AGA.

Objective: This study compared and evaluated the clinical and radiographic results of guided bone regeneration using platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) and collagen membrane as barrier membrane in immediately placed implants with severe buccal bone defect (with respect to marginal bone level, implant stability quotient [ISQ]), and histological analysis of new bone formation. Materials and Methods: Sixteen implants were placed in patients requiring immediate implant placement and having a buccal wall defect and randomly divided into two groups one receiving PRF membranes and other collagen membrane. The sites were grafted with bone-substitute material in both the groups. After 4 months, at the time of second-stage surgery, implant stability is measured by Osstell Mentor, crestal bone level on mesial and distal sides of implant by digital intraoral periapical, buccal defect clinically by probe and histological analysis of biopsied bone. Results: The results were insignificant and comparable in both the groups when comparison was made between the groups. The mean buccal defect, mean values of average ISQ, crestal bone level in both the groups at baseline and after 4 months were compared. No significant difference between both the groups was found after 4 months. Bone quality seemed to be equal in both groups after histological analysis. Within the limits of the study, both the groups had shown similar results in all criteria. Conclusion: Within the limitation of the study, it can be concluded that both the treatment modalities are successful in terms of buccal defect reduction, stability, and increase in crestal bone level.

Nowadays, dental implants are the best treatment option for tooth loss, but implant placement requires sufficient bone volume. In defect area of alveolar ridge, augmentation is done by various available methods. Utilizing the growth factors such as platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) derived from patient's blood platelets improve treatment outcome. PRF accelerates the wound healing, enhances osteogenic activity as well as regulates the inflammation. Bone grafting, guided bone regeneration, and ridge-split technique promote new bone formation. The aim of this case report is to demonstrate an efficient method of bone augmentation using sticky bone along with PRF membrane, followed by ridge-split technique and engagement of nasal floor to place implant.