» My Thoughts on Acell and PRP

About two years ago there was buzz on the web about something called Acell or more specifically Acell “Matrix”. Acell is a company that has been making wound healing products primarily for the veterinarian industry for years. After a lawsuit between Acell and University of Pensylvania was ruled (Acell won) Acell was allowed to move forward with the human version of their “Matrix” technology. In short Matrix, when applied properly, was supposed to regenerate not only human tissue but also hair bearing skin instead of scar tissue in even severe wounds. There was some impressive photographic evidence from the veterinarian side of things to back up the claims. There was even a video of a gentleman that regrew the tip of his finger with this stuff.

The hopes and dreams of thousands of hair transplant patients were about to be realized. The Holy Grail of hair restoration was within sight; the never ending donor supply. Well, I had more down to earth hopes for this technology in that donor wound closures could heal with little to no evidence of surgery. I am sad to report that at this time neither my ambitions nor those more bold ambitions of others have come to pass. It may still yet be something that is beneficial but it is not magic solution.

Now we have PRP therapy. PRP stands for Platelet Rich Plasma and the “therapy” in this new development is the process in which the patient’s blood is drawn, placed into a centrifuge and then the plasma that is separated from the blood is re-injected into the patient’s scalp. The idea here is that a “stem cell” type of reaction occurs in that the patient’s hair follicle will thicken up. Supposedly the PRP will help to stimulate thicker hair growth. So far, to me, the evidence that this is a benefit is not only circumstantial but is outright MIA.

Lately I’ve been seeing both of these “therapies” thrown around as if they are valid treatments by various clinics. A few clinics even offered PRP within mere DAYS of the buzzwords being introduced to the hair loss online communities. No research was done, no results to validate any efficacy, nothing. But the clinics offering these therapies have no problems charging the patient for the added benefit of these unproven offerings. Sorry, but I think that if one is going to charge hundreds or even thousands of dollars for a treatment they should have consistent results to warrant such fees.

I have seen announcements made as if they are a big deal but in my opinion these announcements of bogus scientific offerings do little more than help to perpetuate the black sheep image that the hair restoration industry has garnered in the medical community. Save your money, people. There are so few things out there that actually do something positive for you hair. The more you listen to these bogus claims the more you will believe them and then of course the more you will buy them. Use your better judgement and of course remember that if it is too good to be true then it most certainly is. Only with CONSISTENT evidence of clearly documented results can you even begin to believe and even then you should still be skeptical.