Clinical Observation On Treatment Of Male Androgenic Alopecia With Microneedle Introduction Of Liquid Dressing Combined With Traditional Medicine

Objectives To comprehensively evaluate the efficacy and safety of microneedle introduction therapy combined with traditional medicine in the treatment of male androgenetic alopecia（AGA）through a clinical trial study.Methods Methods Male patients diagnosed with AGA from October 2020 to November2021 at the hair specialty clinic and dermatology clinic of the Affiliated Hospital of North China University of Technology were selected for the study.The 60 patients with AGA who met the inclusion criteria were randomly divided into group A and group B.Group A:traditional drug group,given finasteride tablets（orally,1mg/time,qd）and 5%minoxidil tincture（topically,1ml/time,bid）;group B:combined microneedle introduction group,combined with microneedle introduction of domain hair liquid dressing treatment（1time/week）on the basis of the treatment regimen in group A.The treatment duration was 16weeks.At the end of treatment,physicians and patients were evaluated for subjective efficacy by comparing standardized clinical photographs taken before and after treatment,respectively.At 0,4,8,12 and 16 weeks of treatment respectively,the objective efficacy evaluation was carried out by observing the changes in the total number of hair trunks,number of terminal hairs,number of fine hairs,total number of hair follicles,number of hair follicles containing different numbers of hairs,average number of hairs per hair follicle unit,yellow dot sign and peri-hair sign before and after treatment in both groups through the hair analysis system.Adverse reactions that occurred during the study period were recorded for safety evaluation.Results 1 Analysis of baseline data:No statistically significant differences were found when comparing age,disease duration,BMI and family history between Group A and Group B（P>0.05）.2.Subjective efficacy evaluation:No statistically significant differences were found when comparing the efficacy evaluation of physicians in Group A and Group B（P>0.05）;no statistically significant differences were found when comparing the efficacy evaluation of patients in Group A and Group B（P>0.05）.3 Objective efficacy evaluation:1)After treatment,the total number of trichomes in both group A and group B increased gradually with time,and the difference was statistically significant(P_time<0.05);at the 4th,8th,12th and 16th weeks of treatment,the total number of trichomes in group B was higher than that in group A,and the overall difference between groups was statistically significant(P_{between groups}<0.05);and the difference between groups increased gradually with the extension of treatment time,especially at 12 weeks of treatment,the difference between groups began to increase significantly,and the difference was statistically significant(P _interaction<0.05).The difference was statistically significant（P<0.05）;compared with the pre-treatment period,the total number of hair trunks in group A started to show a statistical difference from week 12（P<0.05）and the total number of hair trunks in group B started to show a statistical difference from week 8（P<0.05）.2)After treatment,group B was better than group A in terms of increasing the number of terminal hairs,the total number of hair follicles,the number of hair follicles containing 2 hairs and reducing the number of fine hairs,and the difference was statistically significant（P<0.05）.3)After treatment,the differences between the two groups were not statistically significant（P>0.05）in terms of reducing the number of follicles containing single hairs,improving the yellow dot sign and peri-hair sign,increasing the number of follicles containing 3 hairs and the average number of hairs per follicle.4 Safety evaluation:no serious adverse reactions occurred in both groups A and B.The safety was good.Conclusions 1 Microneedle introduction of domain hair liquid dressing combined with traditional medication（oral finasteride tablets,topical 5%minoxidil tincture）was superior to traditional medication in increasing the total number of hair trunks,the number of terminal hairs,the number of hair follicles containing 2 hairs,and reducing the number of fine hairs,and had an earlier onset of action in increasing the total number of hair trunks.2 Both treatment regimens were more effective in reducing the number of hair follicles containing single hairs,improving the yellow dot sign,peri-hair sign,increasing the number of hair follicles containing 3 The efficacy of both regimens was comparable in terms of reducing the number of follicles containing single hairs,improving the yellow spot sign and peri-hair sign,increasing the number of follicles containing 3 hairs,and increasing the average number of hairs per follicle.3 By observing standardised clinical photographs before and after treatment,there was no significant difference in the subjective assessment of efficacy between physicians and patients,while the hair analysis system provided a more accurate visual assessment of hair growth.4 Both regimens had few adverse effects and a good safety profile.Figure 7;Table 10;Reference 148...