Evaluation of platelet-rich fibrin on alveolar bone height after removal of impacted lower third molar

Abstract

Objectives This study aimed to assess the effect of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) on both bone and supporting tissue healing after surgical removal of impacted lower third molar using the digital panoramic bitewing technique.Patients and methods Twenty patients complaining of a bilaterally impacted lower third molar were included in the study. The surgical treatment plan was removal of bilaterally impacted lower third molar during the same visit under local anesthesia. For the study group, represented by the right side, PRF was prepared from the patient's blood and placed inside the socket and as a membrane covering the buccal bone as well as crestal bone distal to the lower second molar, whereas in the control group (left side of the same patient), nothing was applied at the surgical site and the flap was sutured in a regular manner on both sides. All patients were followed up clinically every week. A digital panoramic bitewing radiographic examination was performed preoperatively and then according to the following schedule: (a) immediately postoperatively (1 week), (b) 3 months, and (c) 6 months. ResultsThe study group showed statistically significant higher mean bone height and statistically significant lower mean pocket depth than the control group.Conclusion PRF is recommended for alveolar ridge preservation and shortening of the postoperative healing period after surgical removal of impacted lower third molar.

Evaluation of platelet-rich fibrin in post-exodontic bone regeneration: systematic review

“…21,22 were related to extraction of teeth prior to rehabilitation with dental implants, the results of the studies showed no significant differences for bone filling both clinically and radiographically (P> 0.9; P< 0.5), respectively. 8 studies [20][21][22][23][24]27,[36][37][38][39][40] were related to tooth extraction due to endodontic failure and coronary fracture, where the results showed that the loss of alveolar ridge width in the test group was less than in the control group (-0.97mm, -1.92mm), respectively.…”

“…26 Fontes & cols, 28 reported in their study conducted in 2020 that tissue mineralization using PRF may have some potential to increase it, however, no significant differences were evidenced between the test and control group (P> 0.05). 27 Gasparro et al, 29 in 2020 reported that PRF shows better results in clinical insertion loss (CAL) gain and probing depth reduction, but there was no significant difference, PRF (0.47±0.41 mm) compared to the control group (0.60±0.46 mm). 28 Guzmán & cols, 30 in their 2017 study, showed that there was a difference in bone tissue healing at 60 days of control (p< 0.015).…”