Background: Cicatricial alopecia is a group of disorders that destroy hair follicles which are replaced with fibrosis, causing permanent hair loss. Cicatricial alopecias are subdivided into two groups "primary" and "secondary". For management of 2ry cases, there are different strategies which differ with the location, size and other scarred area characteristics. These strategies include certain surgical procedures such as excision, flap surgery, use of tissue expansion, and hair transplantation that gained popularity as a permanent method for restoring hair loss. In cicatricial alopecia cases, hair transplant is considered challenging because of the degenerative changes and decreased vascularity of these areas that may produce a lower survival rate of donor hair. Aim of Study:This study aimed to evaluate the role of PRP and nanofat injections together with follicular unit extraction technique in restoration of hair in secondary cicatricial alopecia.Material and Methods: This study was conducted on 30 patients with secondary cicatricial alopecia. Patients were divided into 3 groups, 10 patients in each. Group A: Received PRP with hair transplantation, group B: Received nanofat injections with hair transplantation, while in group C (Control group) patients underwent hair transplantation only.Results: Although adding PRP or nanofat injections with hair transplantation procedure provides an excellent improvement in the texture and quality of the scarred tissues compared to other cases underwent without, there were no significant differences in the clinical outcomes of hair restoration including hair growth density.

Background Thoracodorsal artery perforator (TDAP) flap and muscle‐sparing latissimus dorsi (MSLD) flap have been frequently used for axillary coverage after hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) excision. However, none showed superiority to others. This study compared both flaps to define the ideal option, highlighting flap outcomes and functional and aesthetic results. Methods A retrospective study was conducted to compare both flaps that were used for axillary reconstruction in nine patients with bilateral HS Hurley stage III between 2017 and 2020. Eight TDAP and 10 MSLD flaps underwent functional evaluation using shoulder abduction angle (SA); the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score; visual analog scale (VAS) for pain; and the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) questionnaires. Aesthetic assessment included the Scar Cosmesis Assessment and Rating (SCAR) scale and arm–chest interval. Results The mean operating time was 194.4 ± 51.58 and 128.5 ± 31.45 min for TDAP and MSLD (p = .009), respectively. Flap complications were significantly higher in the TDAP group (p = .034). There was no significant difference between both groups regarding SA; DASH, DLQI, VAS, and SCAR scale (p > .05). The mean arm–chest interval was significantly longer in the MSLD than in the TDAP group by 6.9 mm (p = .001). Conclusions TDAP and MSLD are comparable versatile flaps to eradicate axillary HS with higher TDAP flap complications. Although the TDAP flap is less bulky than the MSLD flap, the MSLD flap shortens the harvesting time without a significant difference in functional outcomes and scar results.

State-of-the-art intrusion detection and monitoring systems produce hundreds or even thousands of events every day. Unfortunately, most of these events are false positives, or irrelevant and can be considered as background noise, which makes their correlation, analysis and investigation very complicated and resource consuming. This paper attempts to simulate the modeling of background noise using the non-stationary time series analysis with lag smoothing Kalman filter. Then introduce and compare a second technique applying a multilayered perceptron neural network with back propagation network; an approach that is used for the first time in modeling and correlating the background noise. DARPA Dataset is used to analyze and compare both techniques and finally a verification experiment is conducted using a gathered dataset from real network environment.

Background: Although different bone graft materials have been suggested in the literatures for alveolar cleft reconstruction including autogenous, allogenic, xenogenic, and alloplastic grafts, Autogenous bone graft either from the iliac crest or the tibial plateau remains the gold standard against which other graft materials are evaluated. However, the procedure is invasive and associated with a potential risk of early complications such as bleeding, pain, infection, fracture and/or late complications such as chronic pain, scarring, paresthesia and gait abnormalities. Moreover, its failure rate is about 15%.Objectives: To assess the efficacy of using adipose derived stem cells (ASCs) in alveolar cleft reconstruction; whether added to the cancellous bone or used with demineralized bone matrix scaffold; in comparison to the conventional iliac crest bone grafting (ICBG).Patients and Methods: 24 patients underwent alveolar cleft reconstruction at the age of mixed dentition over a 3years period; three of them had two grafted sites (bilateral cleft cases) giving an overall total of 27 grafted sites assessed during this study. Their mean age was 11.9 years and their mean postoperative follow-up was 11.7 months. Of these, 9 constituted the ICBG group (standard group), 10 constituted the ACSs with ICBG scaffold (ASCs/ICBG) group, whereas the remaining 8 made up ACSs with DBM (ASCs/DBM) group. Results were assessed by rating the radiographs obtained 6 months postoperatively according to Bergland scale.Results: Alveolar cleft repairs using cancellous bone only (ICBG group) were 77.8 percent successful, alveolar cleft repairs using cancellous bone enhanced with ASCs (ASCs/ ICBG group) were 90 percent successful, and alveolar cleft repairs using DBM enhanced with ASCs (ASCs/DBM group) were 50 percent successful, but there were no significant statistical difference between the groups. ASCs/DBM group shows significantly shorter operative time, and higher cleft site infection rates. Conclusion:Using ASCs whether with DBM or ICBG is not significantly better than the conventional method, while using DBM significantly reduced operative time, but associated with higher risk of infection.

No abstract