Comparison between 308‐nm excimer light alone versus 308‐nm excimer light and platelet‐rich plasma in the treatment for localized vitiligo

Background Monochromatic excimer light (MEL) is a safe and effective treatment for localized stable vitiligo. Previous reports of the combination of platelet‐rich plasma (PRP) with narrowband ultraviolet B (NB‐UVB) or excimer laser yielded conflicting results. Aims This prospective, self‐controlled, randomized, comparative study aimed to assess whether the addition of PRP to MEL therapy would be of an additive benefit in the treatment for localized stable vitiligo. Patients/Methods The current study included 36 patients with at least 2 more or less symmetrical patches of localized stable vitiligo (72 patches). For each patient, each of the 2 vitiligo patches was randomly assigned to receive either MEL therapy (twice weekly) with bi‐weekly intradermal PRP (group A) or MEL therapy alone (group B) for a maximum of 4 months or till complete repigmentation. The degree of repigmentation was categorized as absent (0%), poor (1–25%), moderate (26–50%), good (51–75%), or excellent (>75%). Patients were asked about their level of satisfaction (not satisfied at all, partially satisfied, satisfied, or completely satisfied). Side effects were recorded, and follow‐up for 3 months was done. Results No statistically significant difference was observed between the 2 groups regarding the degree of repigmentation, the patients’ level of satisfaction, and the frequency of side effects (p = 0.504, 0.490, and 0.912, respectively). At the end of the follow‐up period, recurrence was observed in only 3 patients. Conclusions The current study showed no statistically significant difference between using MEL alone or with intradermal PRP in the treatment for localized stable vitiligo.