PRP treatment for hair loss. Is there any difference between the cheap and the expensive PRP treatments?

Thank you for your question. You describe you went for a PRP treatment that was less expensive, asking if you should’ve gone for a PRP treatment which was more expensive. The clinic offering the more expensive treatment stated they have better machinery. You want to figure out if there is value in having more expensive PRP treatment.
This question is coming up a lot lately, and I can certainly help you get some perspective as someone who has a lot of experience with PRP. A little: background, I’m a Board-certified cosmetic surgeon and Fellowship-trained oculofacial plastic and reconstructive surgeon. I have been in practice in Manhattan and Long Island for over 20 years. I am also the founder of TrichoStem™ Hair Regeneration Centers, a system we developed using PRP and a material called extracellular matrix which we started over 7-8 years ago, which has become a significant treatment for male and female pattern hair loss.
I think it is very important for you to question things in a different way. Something I observed, going back to the origin of our treatment system, we were using PRP and this material extracellular matrix which is a wound healing material that amplify the wound healing response. We got a better healing process for the donor area of a hair transplant patient, as well as better yield in the grafts , so we wanted to see if this would help. Not only did it help and make a big impact, but it also resulted in a lot of our patients thinning becoming thicker, and these areas were not transplanted.
Over the course of time, I decided to see if I can get long-term sustainable benefit for patients non-surgically using PRP and extracellular matrix. We figured out a system, an algorithm, that is able to non-surgically help our patients’ male and female pattern hair loss with long-term growth and improvement. Basically, our treatment is able to reactivate hair that isn't growing, usually meaning hair in a resting stage which by definition is proportionally greater when there’s thinning, thickening of thinning hair, as well as prolonging the growth cycle.
After approximately 7-8 years of doing these treatments, I developed a lot of experience with a wide range of patients, everyone from a young 16-year-old woman, to men and women in their 70s. We also developed a classification system that factors in: gender, age, age of onset of hair loss, rate of progression, degree of progression of hair loss, other medical treatments for hair loss, and other medical factors including hormonal levels and previous surgeries.
We have established a system so we have patients who we’ve done one injection treatment that lead to sustainable growth exceeding 5 years. That does not apply to everyone because patients have different clinical pictures that include a limitation of their growth cycle, and other variables that affect that.
We use PRP as part of our treatment because over time, I made observations with PRP, and different types of PRP, and combining it with different formulations of extracellular matrix, then looking at our patients carefully. That means seeing our patients every 3 months and documenting results. It has taken several years, a lot of time, and many patients to develop this system.
Throughout this time, I have witnessed an incredible shift in my colleagues perception of the value of PRP for hair loss. When we were doing this work in 2011 to 2012, our colleagues were generally openly dismissive, and didn't feel PRP had any value. In the aesthetic field, we were already using PRP for helping skin, wrinkles, under eye dark circles, and skin quality overall, so we already knew PRP had benefit.  From those observations, I knew PRP alone was also limited as it can stimulate hair growth, but the longevity and effect are limited. So in our practice, we do our Hair Regeneration treatment system based on a combination of extracellular matrix with platelet-rich plasma (PRP).
I also want to teach you a little about the history of PRP. PRP was originally developed by oral surgeons who were trying to improve outcomes with dental implant surgery. They did a very simple spinning of PRP, and worked with very basic circumstances with no fancy machines, and just a centrifuge, but they got very good results. Further along, PRP was used in the field of orthopedic surgery for a lot of different issues in joints.
Now in the marketplace, there are a lot of different companies that claim their PRP is better than others, claiming higher concentrations, and different processes. When you look at anybody making these claims, can they back them up with clinical evidence? I would argue that is not likely. To prove one type of PRP is so much better than another, especially for hair loss, you need very large numbers of patients, then make very objective comparisons. You can do split scalp studies, match patients, but you need large numbers to show a distinct advantage. My perspective is PRP alone is simply not enough. In our practice, we have patients who come from all over the world, and established that the TrichoStem™ Hair Regeneration system can get years of benefit.
At this point in time, we developed not only an algorithm for treatment, but also this classification system with variables I described, and from that we developed treatment plans. To advocate for the individual patient, ask the clinic how successful their treatment is, and what the follow-up process is like. When we evaluate of our patients, we spend time not only doing photography with digital cameras and microscope photos, but an extensive evaluation of the medical history, and follow our patients every 3-6 months, which is done for years as part of a treatment plan. We generally do one injection, then follow our patients progress, see when there’s a plateau, and depending on their clinical picture, we decide if there is a value in a second injection.
When you evaluate clinics, if they’re offering you a better treatment because they have more expensive machines, I don't think that is a reason to choose a clinic over another. I have seen over the past several years as people recognized the value of PRP for hair loss, which has finally been published in dermatology literature, that doctors are using different machines to try to differentiate themselves. It’s very similar to what we see with lasers. Everybody claims to have the best laser, but it’s not the laser, and it’s not the device, but it’s the doctor and their clinical judgement. Look again at the doctor who is offering you this treatment, their experience, their number of patients they can show you, and their before and after photos. See if they really stand behind their work and can follow you closely.
Hair loss treatment is not just getting PRP treatments, hair loss treatment is management; it’s looking at the whole patient, the whole picture. I would be cautious of anybody who claims to have a better machine, and therefore will charge more. As a cosmetic surgeon in a practice where I do surgery, eyelids, facelifts, lasers, and injectable treatments, I can buy any machine I want to help my patients. When I look at all the different types of PRP, and how we developed it over time, we feel we have good quality PRP in what we use. We need the extracellular matrix to be part of that whole formation to get the most optimal results according to our clinical experience, and we support that clinical experience by showing our patients extensive numbers of before and after photos. I hope that was helpful, I wish you the best of luck, and thank you for your question.