{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: Comparing novel versus conventional technique of platelet-rich plasma therapy in periorbital hyperpigmentation: A randomized prospective split-face study.
{Author}: Budania A;Mandal S;Pathania YS;Lahoria U;Khan MA;Puri I;Mishra R;
{Journal}: J Cosmet Dermatol
{Volume}: 20
{Issue}: 10
{Year}: Oct 2021
{Factor}: 2.189
{DOI}: 10.1111/jocd.14121
{Abstract}: <B>BACKGROUND: </B>Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has been found to be effective in treating periorbital hyperpigmentation (POH). PRP prepared by double-spin (DS) method and activated by calcium has been used conventionally. PRP can be prepared by single spin (SS) and activated at low temperature (novel method), but the evidence is limited.<BR><B>OBJECTIVE: </B>To compare the novel and conventional PRP in the treatment of periorbital hyperpigmentation.<BR><B>METHODS: </B>We selected 21 patients of POH and randomly divided the face into two halves. One-half of the face (group A) was treated with novel PRP (SS and low-temperature activation). The other half (group B) was treated with conventional PRP (DS and calcium activation). A total of 3 PRP injections were given at 4 weekly intervals. Patients were observed and assessed on 12th week by photography, dermoscopy, visual analog scale (VAS) score, and Dermatology life quality index (DLQI). Platelet counts and growth factors were assessed in PRP.<BR><B>RESULTS: </B>Mean platelet count in novel and conventional PRP was 7.41 ± 1.76 lacs and 8.17 ± 2.23 lacs (p = 0.348). Mean photographic and dermoscopic assessment at the end of the study in group A and group B was 52.33 ± 6.468 and 53.14 ± 6.99 (p = 0.151). Change in VAS in groups A and B was 3.85 ± 1.27 and 3.90 ± 1.04 (p = 0.895). Levels of various growth factors assessed by ELISA did not differ significantly. There was significant decline in DLQI.<BR><B>CONCLUSIONS: </B>The novel method is not inferior to conventional method of PRP in the treatment of periorbital hyperpigmentation.