Publication: Synthetic hair reactions and treatment of complications: Case reports
Issued Date
2020-01-01
Resource Type
ISSN
14732165
14732130
14732130
Other identifier(s)
2-s2.0-85079491131
Rights
Mahidol University
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology. (2020)
Suggested Citation
Daranporn Triwongwaranat, Waranya Boonchai, Chanika Subchookul, Panitta Sitthinamsuwan, Rattapon Thuangtong Synthetic hair reactions and treatment of complications: Case reports. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology. (2020). doi:10.1111/jocd.13318 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/53807
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
Synthetic hair reactions and treatment of complications: Case reports
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
© 2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Background: Synthetic hair fiber implantation first achieved widespread use in the 1970s, but in 1983, the US Federal Drug Administration banned the fibers due to its complications. Currently available synthetic fibers consist of polyamide material, which has been claimed to be effective and safe. Nevertheless, its use for hair restoration is controversial because of complications such as recurrent infections; the rejection and the faster-than-anticipated loss of fibers; frequent allergic reactions; fears about carcinogenicity; cicatricial alopecia; granulomatous hypersensitivity; and cyst formation. Aims: To report complications of synthetic hair implantation and treatments. Methods: We report the clinical data, pathological studies, and treatment outcomes of two patients who developed complications after a synthetic hair implantation. Results: Our case reports showed significant moderate-to-severe adverse events, including recurrent folliculitis, scalp crusting, scarring, the matting and breakage of fibers, and granulomatous reactions. The onset of the reactions varied between 1 and 8 weeks. Pathological studies showed that the implantation of the synthetic hair into the scalp produced a hyperplastic proliferation of epidermal cells, foreign body granuloma, and persistent acute inflammation due to bacterial infections. In our study, definitive treatment was ineffective until the synthetic fibers were removed from the scalp. Conclusion: These significant adverse reactions may limit the benefits of synthetic hair fiber implantation for some patients. Although the inflammations were initially controlled by oral and topical antibiotics, a variety of antibiotics were unable to control the folliculitis. The fibers were ultimately removed, following which, the inflammations improved.