Clinical effects of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) following surgical extraction of lower third molar

Effect of platelet-rich fibrin on the recovery after third molar surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This meta-analysis aimed to elucidate the effects of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) on the recovery of alveolar bone after surgical removal of the mandibular third molars. PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase databases were searched from the inception to February 2023 for relevant studies on the application of PRF after the extraction of impacted mandibular third molars, with the language limited to English. Literature screening was conducted by two independent researchers. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was adopted for quality evaluation, and Stata 15.0 was used for statistical analysis. A total of 33 randomized controlled trials were included in the present study. Following surgical removal of the mandibular third molars, 1139 tooth sockets were filled with PRF, while 1138 sockets were sutured after conventional saline irrigation. The meta-analyses showed that PRF can relieve pain [(RR 0.454; 95% CI 0.23, 0.891); (SMD -0.74; 95% CI -0.97, 0.52)], improve swelling (SMD -1.48; 95% CI -1.90, -1.06), alleviate trismus (SMD -0.35; 95% CI -0.51, -0.19), reduce dry socket (SMD -0.18; 95% CI -030, -0.05), and promote bone tissue healing (SMD 2.34; 95% CI 0.18, 4.51). The current study confirms that PRF can reduce some postoperative complications. Local application of PRF after lower third molar extraction is a viable method for relieving pain and swelling, reducing the incidence of dry socket and trismus, and increasing bone density. However, whether it can promote soft tissue healing remains unclear. For patients undergoing complicated surgical extraction, local application of PRF into the sockets might be a good option.

Management of canine wounds using platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) biomaterial. A case series report

BACKGROUND

The increasing interest in platelet-based therapies has underwritten the development of novel veterinary regenerative treatments. The haemoderivative platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) comprises abundant concentrations of platelets and leucocytes, above the physiologic baseline, which are considered essential elements for wound regeneration, stimulating local angiogenesis, cellular migration, proliferation and differentiation, considered essential for skin repair.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to describe the treatment of eight dogs with naturally occurring cutaneous wounds, where autologous PRF therapy was applied, using a protocol developed by our group.

METHODS

Eight dogs, aged between 7-month and 9-year old, from different breeds and sexes, were enrolled in this study. Four of these wounds were clinically infected. In three cases, two PRF treatments were performed during the first week of treatment, followed by single weekly treatments from the second week onwards, until exophytic granulation tissues were present. In each case, the treatment was finalized only when complete wound closure was achieved. Wounds did not receive topical antiseptics, antibiotics or topical drugs to promote wound healing during the treatment.

RESULTS

PRF-grafting treatments were well tolerated in all treated wounds, inducing significant granulation tissue formation. PRF clots acted as a natural tissue filler, promoting epithelization and wound closure, without the requirement of topical antimicrobial/antiseptics application, or additional surgical debridement. Evident skin contraction was recorded in larger injuries and all the treatments resulted in vestigial aesthetic scars where hair growth was also observed.

CONCLUSIONS

PRF-therapy obtained promising results, as an alternative wound treatment, revealing a biological regenerative action, prompting the natural skin healing process.

Does the Choice of Preparation Protocol for Platelet-Rich Fibrin Have Consequences for Healing and Alveolar Ridge Preservation After Tooth Extraction? A Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

Multiple preparation protocols for platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) are in use today, and clinical results are often heterogeneous. This study analyzes the impact of the chosen PRF preparation protocol on 1) wound healing and 2) alveolar ridge preservation.

METHODS

For this systematic review and meta-analysis, eligible studies were identified in PubMed and Cochrane databases. Included were randomized controlled and controlled clinical trials with healthy patients treated with PRF after atraumatic tooth extraction compared to untreated socket(s), reporting at least one of the following outcome variables: pain, swelling, soft tissue healing, alveolar osteitis risk, horizontal and vertical bone loss, socket fill, and new bone formation. Main predictor variable was relative centrifugal force (RCF) comparing high RCF (high PRF), intermediate RCF (standard [S-PRF]), low RCF (advanced PRF), and various RCF settings (concentrated growth factor preparation [CGF]). The type of centrifugation tubes (silica-coated plastic and glass) was a secondary predictor. Weighted or standardized mean differences, risk ratio and corresponding 95% confidence intervals were calculated.

RESULTS

Forty studies published between 2012 and 2022 were selected. The pooled effects of all outcomes were significant against untreated sockets. Within the subgroups high PRF or advanced PRF had the lowest efficacy for many outcome parameters. Pain reduction (in visual analog scale units) was highest for S-PRF (-1.18 [-1.48, -0.88], P < .00001) and CGF (-1.03 [-1.16, -0.90], P < .001). The risk ratio of alveolar osteitis (0.09 [0.01, 0.69], P < .02) and soft tissue healing (standardized mean difference = 2.55 [2.06, 3.03], P < .001) were best for CGF. No subgroup differences were found for bone-related outcomes. No meaningful analysis of the tube material effect was possible.

CONCLUSION

This study confirms that PRF is associated with reduced postoperative complications but indicates that preparation protocol influences clinical outcomes. S-PRF and CGF protocols appear to be superior for several outcome parameters.

Quantitative assessment of platelet rich fibrin for the repair of extraction socket in a rat model

The present study evaluated the quantitative effects of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) for the repair of extraction socket in Sprague Dawley (SD) rat model by assessing several key clinical parameters. Seventy two male SD rats were subjected to surgical extraction of the maxillary right incisor. Rats were randomly divided into four groups with eighteen rats in each group based on the treatment received: extraction socket without treatment of PRF was taken as control (group I). Extraction socket implanted with 0.1, 0.2, and 0.4 mL of PRF was taken as study groups (groups II, III, and IV). The obtained results demonstrated that, low dose of PRF efficiently enhanced the natural healing cascade. Whereas, high dose interfered with native tissue contribution and altered the natural healing process. The beneficial effects of quantity-based application of PRF may raise the possibility of a new approach as complementary therapy besides conventional treatment.

Local interventions for the management of alveolar osteitis (dry socket)

BACKGROUND

Alveolar osteitis (dry socket) is a complication of dental extractions more often involving mandibular molar teeth. It is associated with severe pain developing 2 to 3 days postoperatively with or without halitosis, a socket that may be partially or totally devoid of a blood clot, and increased postoperative visits. This is an update of the Cochrane Review first published in 2012.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of local interventions used for the prevention and treatment of alveolar osteitis (dry socket) following tooth extraction.

SEARCH METHODS

An Information Specialist searched four bibliographic databases up to 28 September 2021 and used additional search methods to identify published, unpublished, and ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of adults over 18 years of age who were having permanent teeth extracted or who had developed dry socket postextraction. We included studies with any type of local intervention used for the prevention or treatment of dry socket, compared to a different local intervention, placebo or no treatment. We excluded studies reporting on systemic use of antibiotics or the use of surgical techniques because these interventions are evaluated in separate Cochrane Reviews.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We followed Cochrane statistical guidelines and reported dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and calculated 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random-effects models. For some of the split-mouth studies with sparse data, it was not possible to calculate RR so we calculated the exact odds ratio (OR) instead. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the body of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 49 trials with 6771 participants; 39 trials (with 6219 participants) investigated prevention of dry socket and 10 studies (with 552 participants) looked at the treatment of dry socket. 16 studies were at high risk of bias, 30 studies at unclear risk of bias, and 3 studies at low risk of bias. Chlorhexidine in the prevention of dry socket When compared to placebo, rinsing with chlorhexidine mouthrinses (0.12% and 0.2% concentrations) both before and 24 hours after extraction(s) substantially reduced the risk of developing dry socket with an OR of 0.38 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.58; P < 0.00001; 6 trials, 1547 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The prevalence of dry socket varies from 1% to 5% in routine dental extractions to upwards of 30% in surgically extracted third molars. The number of patients needed to be treated (NNT) with chlorhexidine rinse to prevent one patient having dry socket was 162 (95% CI 155 to 240), 33 (95% CI 27 to 49), and 7 (95% CI 5 to 10) for control prevalence of dry socket 0.01, 0.05, and 0.30 respectively.  Compared to placebo, placing chlorhexidine gel intrasocket after extractions reduced the odds of developing a dry socket by 58% with an OR of 0.44 (95% CI 0.27 to 0.71; P = 0.0008; 7 trials, 753 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The NNT with chlorhexidine gel (0.2%) to prevent one patient developing dry socket was 180 (95% CI 137 to 347), 37 (95% CI 28 to 72), and 7 (95% CI 5 to 15) for control prevalence of dry socket of 0.01, 0.05, and 0.30 respectively. Compared to chlorhexidine rinse (0.12%), placing chlorhexidine gel (0.2%) intrasocket after extractions was not superior in reducing the risk of dry socket (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.20; P = 0.22; 2 trials, 383 participants; low-certainty evidence).  The present review found some evidence for the association of minor adverse reactions with use of 0.12%, 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthrinses (alteration in taste, staining of teeth, stomatitis) though most studies were not designed explicitly to detect the presence of hypersensitivity reactions to mouthwash as part of the study protocol. No adverse events were reported in relation to the use of 0.2% chlorhexidine gel placed directly into a socket. Platelet rich plasma in the prevention of dry socket  Compared to placebo, placing platelet rich plasma after extractions was not superior in reducing the risk of having a dry socket (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.33; P = 0.17; 2 studies, 127 participants; very low-certainty evidence).  A further 21 intrasocket interventions to prevent dry socket were each evaluated in single studies, and there is insufficient evidence to determine their effects. Zinc oxide eugenol versus Alvogyl in the treatment of dry socket Two studies, with 80 participants, showed that Alvogyl (old formulation) is more effective than zinc oxide eugenol at reducing pain at day 7 (mean difference (MD) -1.40, 95% CI -1.75 to -1.04; P < 0.00001; 2 studies, 80 participants; very low-certainty evidence) A further nine interventions for the treatment of dry socket were evaluated in single studies, providing insufficient evidence to determine their effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tooth extractions are generally undertaken by dentists for a variety of reasons, however, all but five studies included in the present review included participants undergoing extraction of third molars, most of which were undertaken by oral surgeons. There is moderate-certainty evidence that rinsing with chlorhexidine (0.12% and 0.2%) or placing chlorhexidine gel (0.2%) in the sockets of extracted teeth, probably results in a reduction in dry socket. There was insufficient evidence to determine the effects of the other 21 preventative interventions each evaluated in single studies. There was limited evidence of very low certainty that Alvogyl (old formulation) may reduce pain at day 7 in patients with dry socket when compared to zinc oxide eugenol.

Assessment of the Effect of A-PRF Application during the Surgical Extraction of Third Molars on Healing and the Concentration of C-Reactive Protein

Extraction procedures for mandibular third molars are performed all over the world every day. Local inflammation resulting from surgery, and the pain that patients experience, often make it impossible to take up daily life activities, such as work or sports. Growth and anti-inflammatory factors, located in the fibrin network, have a positive effect on tissue-healing processes and should also reduce local inflammation. Advanced platelet-rich fibrin (A-PRF) applied locally influences such processes as: angiogenesis, osteogenesis and collagenogenesis. It also affects mesenchymal cell lines and anti- and pro-inflammatory mediators. Due to the autologous origin of the material, their use in guide bone regeneration (GBR) is more and more widespread in dentistry. The results of previous studies indicate that the use of A-PRF in the treatment area significantly reduces postoperative pain, while the formation of edema is not affected. C-reactive protein (CRP), which is an acute phase protein, appears in the blood as a consequence of inflammation. Due to the dynamics of changes in concentration of CRP, it is a protein that is sufficiently sensitive and is used in studies to monitor the tissue healing process. The effect of A-PRF application on CRP concentrations, before and after surgery, has not been investigated yet. The study was conducted on 60 generally healthy patients. A faster decrease of CRP levels was shown in patients who used A-PRF after the procedure. Additionally, it accelerated healing and reduced the occurrence of a dry socket close to 0.

Pain in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Implant Dentistry: Types and Management

Over the years, the pain has been defined numerous times in several ways. In oral and maxillofacial surgery, the occurrence of pain, especially postoperatively, is anticipated. Pain arises as a combination of various processes after tissue damage. Distinct pain experiences in oral surgery were depicted in several previous studies, adding knowledge to the field. The management of these encounters has been suggested over time, improving treatment approaches in the clinical setting. This review aims to understand the pain and its types and intervention in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery.

Effect of platelet-rich fibrin on the control of alveolar osteitis, pain, trismus, soft tissue healing, and swelling following mandibular third molar surgery: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

The purpose of this study was to estimate the effect of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) on the control of alveolar osteitis (AO), pain, trismus, soft tissue healing, and swelling following mandibular third molar surgery. A comprehensive search of the literature was conducted through PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library up to May 2019. Randomized controlled studies conforming to the inclusion criteria were included. The record screening and data extraction were conducted by two authors independently. The risk of bias assessment was performed according to the guidelines recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration. The quantitative analysis was performed using RevMan version 5.3. Nineteen studies were included in the systematic review and 17 studies were eligible for the meta-analysis. The use of PRF significantly reduced the incidence of AO and postoperative pain when compared to the controls (AO: relative risk 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.28 to 0.65, Z=3.90, P<0.0001 (I²=0%); pain: day 1, standardized mean difference (SMD) -1.12, 95% CI -1.87 to -0.37, Z=2.93, P=0.003 (I²=95%); day 3, SMD -0.93, 95% CI -1.48 to -0.38, Z=3.30, P=0.001 (I²=92%); day 7, SMD -1.84, 95% CI -2.98 to -0.71, Z=3.19, P=0.001 (I²=97%)). Additionally, the result showed a better soft tissue healing when PRF was used (mean difference -0.63, 95% CI -1.08 to -0.18, Z=2.76, P=0.006 (I²=90%)). The use of PRF reduced the incidence of AO and postoperative pain following third molar surgery. Furthermore, PRF may also improve the postoperative soft tissue healing.

Platelet-rich fibrin in oral surgical procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The effect of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) in enhancing the healing after oral surgical interventions is still a matter of debate. The purpose of this study was to identify instances where PRF has been shown to be effective in oral surgical procedures. A comprehensive literature search was performed up to 2017 on PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus and LILACS databases and grey literature. The full-text of potentially relevant studies were reviewed and only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included. A total of 559 studies were found, of which 30 were included for qualitative analysis and 13 for quantitative analysis. Three review authors assessed the risk of bias independently. The available literature suggests that PRF has a positive effect in improving alveolar preservation on extraction sockets and around dental implants. The qualitative analysis showed a significantly better effect of PRF in promoting bone regeneration for alveolar cleft reconstruction. The meta-analysis for third molar surgery showed a decrease in prevalence of alveolar osteitis. PRF increased implant stability 1 week and 1 month after surgery (P=0.0005 and 0.0003). Due to the lack of studies with low risk of bias and a limited number of patients available, further RCTs are needed to confirm these results.