Aims and objectives: The aim of this study is to systematically review randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) studying various types of regenerative medicine methods (such as platelet-rich plasma, stromal vascular fraction, cell therapy, conditioned media, etc.) in treating specific dermatologic diseases. Rejuvenation, scarring, wound healing, and other secondary conditions of skin damage were not investigated in this study. Method: Major databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, were meticulously searched for RCTs up to January 2024, focusing on regenerative medicine interventions for specific dermatologic disorders (such as androgenetic alopecia, vitiligo, alopecia areata, etc.). Key data extracted encompassed participant characteristics and sample sizes, types of regenerative therapy, treatment efficacy, and adverse events. Results: In this systematic review, 64 studies involving a total of 2888 patients were examined. Women constituted 44.8% of the study population, while men made up 55.2% of the participants, with an average age of 27.64 years. The most frequently studied skin diseases were androgenetic alopecia (AGA) (45.3%) and vitiligo (31.2%). The most common regenerative methods investigated for these diseases were PRP and the transplantation of autologous epidermal melanocyte/keratinocyte cells, respectively. Studies reported up to 68.4% improvement in AGA and up to 71% improvement in vitiligo. Other diseases included in the review were alopecia areata, melasma, lichen sclerosus et atrophicus (LSA), inflammatory acne vulgaris, chronic telogen effluvium, erosive oral lichen planus, and dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa. Regenerative medicine was found to be an effective treatment option in all of these studies, along with other methods. The regenerative medicine techniques investigated in this study comprised the transplantation of autologous epidermal melanocyte/keratinocyte cells, isolated melanocyte transplantation, cell transplantation from hair follicle origins, melanocyte–keratinocyte suspension in PRP, conditioned media injection, a combination of PRP and basic fibroblast growth factor, intravenous injection of mesenchymal stem cells, concentrated growth factor, stromal vascular fraction (SVF), a combination of PRP and SVF, and preserving hair grafts in PRP. Conclusion: Regenerative medicine holds promise as a treatment for specific dermatologic disorders. To validate our findings, it is recommended to conduct numerous clinical trials focusing on various skin conditions. In our study, we did not explore secondary skin lesions like scars or ulcers. Therefore, assessing the effectiveness of this treatment method for addressing these conditions would necessitate a separate study.

Aims and objectives: The purpose of this study is to investigate the effectiveness and safety of oral and injectable systemic treatments, such as methotrexate, azathioprine, cyclosporine, tofacitinib, baricitinib, corticosteroids, statins, zinc, apremilast, etc., for treating vitiligo lesions. Method: Databases including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were meticulously searched for studies spanning from 2010 to August 2023, focusing on systemic oral and injectable therapies for vitiligo, using comprehensive keywords and search syntaxes tailored to each database. Key data extracted included study design, treatment efficacy, patient outcomes, patient satisfaction, and safety profiles. Results: In a total of 42 included studies, oral mini‐pulse corticosteroid therapy (OMP) was the subject of six studies (14.2%). Minocycline was the focus of five studies (11.9%), while methotrexate, apremilast, and tofacitinib each were examined in four studies (9.5%). Antioxidants and Afamelanotide were the subjects of three studies each (7.1%). Cyclosporine, simvastatin, oral zinc, oral corticosteroids (excluding OMP) and injections, and baricitinib were each explored in two studies (4.8%). Azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil, and Alefacept were the subjects of one study each (2.4%). Conclusion: Systemic treatments for vitiligo have been successful in controlling lesions without notable side effects. OMP, Methotrexate, Azathioprine, Cyclosporine, Mycophenolate mofetil, Simvastatin, Apremilast, Minocycline, Afamelanotide, Tofacitinib, Baricitinib, Antioxidants, and oral/injectable corticosteroids are effective treatment methods. However, oral zinc and alefacept did not show effectiveness.

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.