Histologic Evidence of New Collagen Formulation Using Platelet Rich Plasma in Skin Rejuvenation: A Prospective Controlled Clinical Study.

BACKGROUND: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is an autologous concentration of human platelets contained in a small volume of plasma and has recently been shown to accelerate rejuvenate aging skin by various growth factors and cell adhesion molecules. OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intradermal injection of PRP in the human facial rejuvenation. METHODS: This study was a prospective, single-center, single-dose, open-label, non-randomized controlled clinical study. PRP injected to the upper site of this right infra-auricular area and all face. Saline was injected to the left infra-auricular area. Histopathological examinations were performed before PRP treatment, 28 days after the PRP, and saline (control) treatments. RESULTS: Twenty women ranging in age from 40 to 49 years (mean age, 43.65±2.43 years) were enrolled in the study. The mean optical densities (MODs) of collagen in the pre-treatment, control, and PRP-treated area were measured. They were 539±93.2, 787±134.15, 1,019±178, respectively. In the MOD of PRP, 89.05 percent improvement was found when MOD of PRP was compared with MOD of pre-treatment. The mean MOD of collagen fibers was clearly highest on the PRP side (p<0.001). The PRP-to-saline improvement ratio (89.05% to 46.01%) was 1.93:1. No serious side effects were detected. CONCLUSION: PRP increases dermal collagen levels not only by growth factors, but also by skin needling (the mesotherapy technique 'point by point'). PRP application could be considered as an effective (even a single application) and safety procedure for facial skin rejuvenation.

Why some of the dermatologists choose to avoid carrying out minimally invasive cosmetic procedures?

BACKGROUND: Some dermatologists choose to avoid carrying out cosmetic dermatology procedures. The aim of this study is to reveal the knowledge and daily outpatient clinic applications of dermatologists in Turkey, and their problems concerning minimally invasive cosmetic procedures (MICPs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was designed as a descriptive cross-sectional study. Between December 2014 and July 2015, a questionnaire was sent to dermatologists by e-mail. RESULTS: Of the 318 participant dermatologists, 233 (73.3%) were female. It was determined that 63.8% of the participants had sufficient knowledge on MICP (very good, good, and medium) while 36.2% had insufficient knowledge (little, very little, and none). About 19.9% of the patients required MICP during outpatient clinic service. The 120 dermatologists who do not apply MICP gave the following reasons: not having adequate training (50%), MICP not being profitable (28.3), not having enough time (25%), being worried about side effects and complications (14.2%), and legal problems (9.2%). CONCLUSION: It was observed that many dermatologists are interested in cosmetic dermatology, received their training on the subject through courses, have sufficient knowledge, and apply these procedures. However, it was also found out that some dermatologists do not apply MICP due to inadequate training, time, and physical constraints.

Do dermatologists have cosmetic procedures?

BACKGROUND: Current approach and ideas of dermatologists about undergoing MICPs themselves are unknown. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to reveal current situation and thought of dermatologists about undergoing minimally invasive cosmetic procedures (MICPs) themselves. METHODS: This study was planned as a cross-sectional, descriptive study and performed between December 2014 and July 2015. A questionnaire comprising 11 questions was sent to dermatologists via electronic mail. RESULTS: Of the 318 dermatologists, 233 (73.3%) were female and 85 (26.7%) were male. It was established that 56 percent (n = 178) of the dermatologists underwent MICPs. There was a statistical difference between the gender and having MICPs (female = 66.1% vs. male = 28.2%; P < 0.001). They selected dermatologists (91%) as a performer and private settings (67.2%). To be young and beautiful (77%), they had MICPs after medical residency (75.3%). Physicians' experience (66.9%) was the most important criterion. Of the dermatologists who did not have MICPs were planning to have MICPs (76.4%). The most frequent reason that stopped them from having MICPs was "not need yet" (62.1%). CONCLUSION: There are some tendencies among the dermatologists while selecting a physician for the procedures. They usually have MICPs after dermatology residency to seem younger and more beautiful by an experienced dermatologist in private setting. Male Turkish dermatologists have MICPs more frequently than the general population. Their satisfaction level with MICPs is very high. Most of dermatologists who do not have MICPs are planning to have MICPs.