Search

ABSTRACT Aims and Objectives Method Results Conclusion The aim of this study is to examine the efficacy and safety of various regenerative medicine treatments, such as cell therapy, platelet‐rich plasma (PRP), plasma‐poor platelet (PPP), plasma‐rich fibrin (PRF), mesenchymal stem cells, stromal vascular fraction (SVF), exosomes, adipose‐derived stem cells (ADSC), and stem cell‐conditioned media (SC‐CM), for treating vitiligo.We conducted a thorough search of major databases such as PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, and selected 48 articles based on specific criteria. We used EndNote X8 and Google Sheets to review and extract data from the articles. After analyzing the studies, we categorized them accordingly.This systematic review analyzed 48 articles involving 2186 patients with vitiligo to assess the effectiveness of regenerative medicine treatments. Key findings revealed that methods such as autologous non‐cultured melanocyte‐keratinocyte transplantation and platelet‐rich plasma (PRP) injection exhibited significant repigmentation, particularly when combined with modalities like NB‐UVB phototherapy and laser treatments. Notably, the autologous melanocyte‐keratinocyte transplantation achieved over 50% repigmentation within 9 months, while PRP demonstrated an average repigmentation of 58.7%, especially effective with CO2 laser treatment. Hair follicle‐derived cell transplantation also showed impressive response rates, achieving good to excellent results in up to 93.8% of patients. Side effects were noted in 21 of 28 studies, primarily involving pain, with no serious adverse events reported. The risk of bias assessment indicated that 37.21% of studies were low risk, while 48.84% had high risks overall. These findings suggest that while regenerative medicine holds promise for vitiligo treatment, further clinical trials are necessary to explore additional methods like stromal vascular fraction and exosomes.We have concluded that regenerative medicine plays an effective role in the treatment of vitiligo lesions. Furthermore, this treatment method is safe and does not cause serious complications. It can be used alone or in combination with other methods for treating vitiligo. To advance the treatment of vitiligo, we recommend conducting clinical trials on the unexplored branches of regenerative medicine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The challenging management of melasma highlights the inadequacies of conventional therapies and their high risk of recurrence. Integrating microneedling for device‐assisted drug delivery with tranexamic acid (TA), recognized for its melanin synthesis inhibition, presents a novel approach that warrants further investigation to fully assess its potential in enhancing melasma treatment efficacy. Methods: Fifty moderate to severe melasma patients participated in this randomized outcome‐assessor‐blinded controlled trial. Patients were randomly allocated into two main groups. Group A received a modified Kligman formula on one hemi‐face on alternate nights for 2 months (A1) and three sessions of microneedling with 10% topical TA on the other hemi‐face at 1‐month intervals (A2). Group B used the same modified Kligman formula on both sides of the face, with one side additionally receiving three sessions of microneedling with 4% TA (B1) and the opposite side with 10% TA (B2). Primary outcomes were % Modified Melasma Area and Severity Index (mMASI) and % visual analogue scale (VAS) change during 6 month follow‐up. Adverse events including post‐inflammatory hyperpigmentation (PIH) and treatment tolerability were recorded. Results: Compared to baseline, the mean mMASI reduction immediately after the final session was higher in A1, B1, and B2 (56.84%, 50.88%, and 55.87%, respectively) than in A2, which saw only a 13.16% reduction. Efficacy notably declined after the cessation of treatment across all groups. While the efficacy within groups A1, B1, and B2 was comparable, microneedling with 4% or 10% TA combined with the topical modified Kligman formula proved more potent in patients at a lower risk of PIH. Overall, 22% of patients reported PIH, particularly in the A2 group (28% of hemi‐faces), with its occurrence significantly associated with treatment during warmer seasons and in darker skin phototypes. Other adverse events were not observed in any patient. Patient satisfaction was highest in groups B1 and B2, where approximately 72% reported 'excellent' satisfaction. The lowest durability rate (16%) was observed in group A2, while the highest (72%) was seen in group B2, comparable with groups A1 and B1. Treatment tolerability was reported 100% in all groups. Conclusion: It was found that the modified Kligman formula outperformed microneedling‐TA alone. However, with optimal patient selection, particularly targeting those at lower risk for PIH with lighter skin phototypes and scheduling treatments during less‐sunny seasons, combining microneedling with 4% or 10% TA and the modified Kligman formula significantly enhanced efficacy and satisfaction rates compared to conventional topical treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The COVID‐19 pandemic has taken many forms and continues to evolve, now around the Omicron wave, raising concerns over the globe. With COVID‐19 being declared no longer a "public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC)," the COVID pandemic is still far from over, as new Omicron subvariants of interest and concern have risen since January of 2023. Mainly with the XBB.1.5 and XBB.1.16 subvariants, the pandemic is still very much "alive" and "breathing." Methods: This review consists of five highly concerning questions about the current state of the COVID Omicron peak. We searched four main online databases to answer the first four questions. For the last one, we performed a systematic review of the literature, with keywords "Omicron," "Guidelines," and "Recommendations." Results: A total of 31 articles were included. The main symptoms of the current Omicron wave include a characteristically high fever, coughing, conjunctivitis (with itching eyes), sore throat, runny nose, congestion, fatigue, body ache, and headache. The median incubation period of the symptoms is shorter than the previous peaks. Vaccination against COVID can still be considered effective for the new subvariants. Conclusion: Guidelines recommend continuation of personal protective measures, third and fourth dose boosters, along with administration of bivalent messenger RNA vaccine boosters. The consensus antiviral treatment is combination therapy using Nirmatrelvir and Ritonavir, and the consensus for pre‐exposure prophylaxis is Tixagevimab and Cilgavimab combination. We hope the present paper raises awareness for the continuing presence of COVID and ways to lower the risks, especially for at‐risk groups. Key points: The COVID pandemic is far from over, with new variants of interest and concern rising since January of 2023 (mainly XBB.1.5 and XBB.1.16 subvariants).The main symptoms of the current Omicron wave include a high fever, coughing, conjunctivitis (with itching of the eyes), sore throat, runny nose and congestion, fatigue, body ache, and headache.The median incubation period for the current peak was calculated to be 3.8 days which is shorter than the incubation period calculated for most of the previous peaks; and the median duration of the symptoms was calculated to be 5 days for the current peak which is shorter than the duration calculated for the previous peaks by 3–5 days.A cumulative 64.42% of the population worldwide are fully vaccinated against COVID‐19 as of June 16, 2023. Vaccination against COVID can still be considered mostly effective against new symptoms, severe disease, long COVID, and death for the new subvariants.Guidelines recommend continuation of personal protective measures, third and fourth dose boosters, particularly in individuals above 60, immunocompromised patients, and healthcare personnel, along with administration of bivalent messenger RNA vaccine boosters.The consensus option for antiviral treatment is combination therapy using Nirmatrelvir and Ritonavir, and the consensus for pre‐exposure prophylaxis is Tixagevimab and Cilgavimab combination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]