Effect of Platelet-Rich Plasma on Bone Grafting of Alveolar Clefts

Does the adjunctive use of autologous platelet concentrate during secondary alveolar bone grafting reduce the risk of wound dehiscence? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Wound dehiscence is a common complication after secondary alveolar bone grafting (SABG), leading to unfavourable surgical outcomes. Studies have shown that autologous platelet concentrates (APC) may enhance wound healing and improve outcomes. Therefore, this review aimed to evaluate in patients with alveolar clefts, whether using APC and iliac crest bone graft can mitigate the likelihood of wound dehiscence formation compared with those who underwent iliac bone grafting only following SABG. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using various electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, EBSCOhost, Ovid MEDLINE, LILACS, Cochrane Library, and grey literature, to include studies until July 31, 2023, without any restriction to language and time of publication. Only randomized (RCT) and controlled (CCT) clinical trials were included. Two independent reviewers screened the studies based on the predefined criteria, after which a qualitative and quantitative analysis was conducted. The search yielded 821 studies, of which seven were deemed eligible for systematic review. The risk of bias assessment done using "The Cochrane collaboration tool for risk of bias assessment" for six RCTs and the "Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions" for one CCT revealed a moderate to high risk of bias. The meta-analysis of five studies showed that the overall risk of developing wound dehiscence was lower in the APC group (RR = 0.33; 95% CI: 0.16, 0.71; p = 0.005; χ2 = 0.82; I2 = 0%). Subgroup analyses based on study design further supported these findings. Although the adjuvant use of APC for alveolar cleft reconstruction reduces the risk of wound dehiscence, more studies with increased scientific rigour and fewer confounding variables are warranted.

The Use of Platelet Concentrates in the Reconstruction of the Alveolar Cleft Defect: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate quantitative and qualitative outputs when comparing the incidence of platelet concentrates (PCs) combined with autogenous bone grafts to an autograft control group for the reconstruction of alveolar cleft defects.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS

Randomized and nonrandomized controlled clinical trials where PCs were used in the reconstruction of alveolar cleft defects.

INTERVENTIONS

Use of PCs in combination with autogenous bone graft in the experimental group and autogenous bone graft alone in the control group.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Average bone formation and bone density were evaluated, mean differences were calculated and pooled by a meta-analysis technique. Additionally, clinical outcomes such as wound dehiscence, closure of the oronasal fistula, pain, swelling, discharges, infections, and bleeding were considered in the qualitative synthesis.

RESULTS

After an evaluation of forty-nine articles, nineteen were considered for the review. The qualitative assessment of bone density, bone formation, and clinical outcomes showed no differences between groups in most of the included studies. The meta-analysis showed no statistical differences between PCs groups when compared to the control group in bone density at three months (mean difference 45.67 HU, P = .23) and six months (mean difference 48.57 HU, P = .64). Neither were statistical differences in the percentage of regenerated bone volume at six months (mean difference 6.39%, P = .15) and the volume of newly formed bone at 12 months (mean difference 0.37 mm3, P = .99).

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences in terms of bone formation, bone density, and clinical outputs between groups.

Effect of adjuvant autologous platelet concentrates on secondary repair of alveolar clefts: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To review the existing evidence on the adjuvant use of autologous platelet concentrates (APCs) with iliac crest bone graft (ICBG) in the reconstruction of the secondary alveolar cleft.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched systematically until November 2022. Clinical trials comparing the three-dimensional radiological outcomes of patients who underwent secondary alveolar bone grafting (SABG) with ICBG and APCs to those with ICBG alone and the radiological outcomes assessed 6 months after surgery were included. Two authors performed the study selection and the assessment of the risk of bias. Meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects model to determine the risk ratio (RR) for developing wound dehiscence and the mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) for the percentage of newly formed bone.

RESULTS

Nine studies (seven RCT and two CCT) were included with a low to high risk of bias. At the 6-month follow-up, the study group revealed insignificant results regarding the percentage of newly formed bone (MD = 6.49; 95% CI: -0.97, 13.94; p = .09; χ2  = 0.01; I2  = 71%). In addition, the overall risk of developing wound dehiscence was lower in the study group (RR = 0.34; 95% CI: 0.15, 0.78; p = .01; χ2  = 0.67; I2  = 0%).

CONCLUSION

Currently, there is insufficient evidence to support the adjuvant use of APCs with ICBG on enhanced bone regeneration following secondary alveolar bone grafting. However, combining ICBG and APCs might be beneficial in reducing the risk of developing wound dehiscence.

The effectiveness of using platelet-rich concentrate with iliac bone graft in the repair of alveolar cleft: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The purpose of this study was to review the existing evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effect of autogenous bone grafts combined with a platelet-rich concentrate on alveolar clefts. An electronic search was conducted in the PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases for studies published between January 2000 and April 2022. This study included six RCTs to evaluate bone quantity (bone formation ratio, %) and quality (bone density in Hounsfield units, HU), as well as complications as a way to assess the safety of the technique. Two independent reviewers assessed the risk of bias. There was no statistically significant difference in bone formation ratio at 6 months of follow-up between the use of autologous bone alone for alveolar bone grafting or adding platelet-rich plasma (PRP) (mean difference (MD) 14.33%, 95% confidence interval (CI) - 7.19% to 35.85%; P = 0.196) or platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) (MD 9.38%, 95% CI -2.36% to 21.12%; P = 0.123) to autologous bone. The MD for the change in bone density at 6 months was in favour of PRP added to autologous bone graft (MD 155.69 HU, 95% CI 99.29-212.09 HU; P < 0.001); however, this result was based on only two studies, one of which had a high risk of bias. Patients who received autologous bone graft with PRP were significantly less likely to experience complications (odds ratio (OR) 0.21, 95% CI 0.05-0.92; P = 0.038), but this was no longer statistically significant after a sensitivity test (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.04-1.56; P = 0.138). In conclusion, this systematic review and meta-analysis appears to show no benefit to using a platelet-rich concentrate combined with autologous bone for alveolar cleft grafting in terms of bone volume, bone density, or complications.

The Effect of Platelet-Rich Plasma on Bone Volume in Secondary Alveolar Bone Grafting in Alveolar Cleft Patients: A Systematic Review

This systematic review aims to investigate the impact of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in conjunction with bone grafting on bone volume outcomes in secondary alveolar bone grafting (SABG) procedures among alveolar cleft patients. An exhaustive search involving PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases yielded 20 relevant titles, ultimately leading to the inclusion of four articles meeting all specified criteria. Based on the Cochrane risk of bias in systematic reviews (ROBIS) tool, the studies showed a high risk of bias. The primary outcome, bone volume assessment, was analyzed across these articles. While the Cochrane ROBIS tool deemed the included articles to have a high risk of bias, the comparison between PRP and Non-PRP groups did not reveal a significant difference in bone volume. Radiographic data illustrated an initial three-month period of bone resorption post-graft, regardless of PRP application, followed by a six-month phase of heightened bone density, particularly discernible in the PRP groups. To sum up, our findings indicate an absence of substantial bone density increase in cleft patients undergoing SABG with PRP augmentation. Nonetheless, there was a modest trend that suggests potential incremental bone density improvement with PRP usage, underscoring the need to conduct rigorously designed, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with low bias to validate these observations.

Effect of Platelet-rich Plasma on the Clinical Success of Alveolar Grafts in Patients With Cleft Lip and Palate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

This study assessed the effect of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) on the clinical success of alveolar grafts in patients with cleft lip and palate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this meta-analysis, a search of the literature was conducted in Medline, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized clinical trials using PRP or platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) along with autogenous bone for alveolar ridge grafts in patients with cleft lip and palate. The methodological quality of the studies was analyzed using Cochrane's risk of the bias assessment tool. The extracted data underwent meta-analysis using the random-effects model.

RESULTS

Of a total of 2256 articles retrieved, 12 met the eligibility criteria and were enrolled; out of which 6 did not undergo meta-analysis due to heterogeneous data. The percentage of defects filled by bone graft was 0.648% (95% confidence interval: -0.15 to 1.45), which was not statistically significant ( P =0.115). Subgroup analysis showed no significant difference based on the use of PRF or PRP ( P =0.28), type of cleft (unilateral/bilateral; P =0.56), or type of radiographic modality (3D/2D; P =0.190). Meta-regression analysis showed that the duration of follow-up and the difference in the mean age of patients did not have a significant effect on the results (R=0, I2: high).

CONCLUSION

The application of PRP/PRF in combination with autogenous bone graft did not have a significant effect on the percentage of alveolar cleft filled by a bone graft. Future clinical studies are required to further elucidate the effect of PRP in the regeneration of alveolar clefts.

Platelet-Rich Plasma in Plastic Surgery: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is gaining popularity and is applied in a variety of clinical settings. This review aims to present and evaluate available evidence regarding the use of PRP in various applications in plastic surgery.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, Medline, and Embase were searched using predefined MeSH terms to identify studies concerning the application of PRP alone or in combination with fat grafting for plastic surgery. The search was limited to articles in English or German. Animal studies, in vitro studies, case reports, and case series were excluded.

RESULTS

Of 50 studies included in this review, eleven studies used PRP for reconstruction or wound treatment, eleven for cosmetic procedures, four for hand surgery, two for burn injuries, five for craniofacial disorders, and 17 as an adjuvant to fat grafting. Individual study characteristics were summarized. Considerable variation in preparation protocols and treatment strategies were observed. Even though several beneficial effects of PRP therapy were described, significance was not always demonstrated, and some studies yielded conflicting results. Efficacy of PRP was not universally proven in every field of application.

CONCLUSION

This study presents an overview of current PRP treatment options and outcomes in plastic surgery. PRP may be beneficial for some indications explored in this review; however, currently available data are insufficient and systematic evaluation is limited due to high heterogeneity in PRP preparation and treatment regimens. Further randomized controlled trials employing standardized protocols are warranted.

A systematic review on regenerative alveolar graft materials in clinical trials: Risk of bias and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Alveolar cleft grafting is a necessary procedure to restore bone defects. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are regarded as a golden standard for investigating the efficacy of treatments. Nevertheless, risk of bias (RoB) can still affect the validity of these trials. We aimed to conduct a systemic review of all control trials (CTs) using regenerative materials for alveolar cleft reconstructions to evaluate their RoB and perform a meta-analysis of new bone formation.

METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE AND Google Scholar were searched up to October 2020. Thereafter, the articles underwent quality assessment (according to the Jadad scale and the Delphi list) for the evaluation of the RoB.

RESULTS

A total of 15 trials met the inclusion criteria, none of which reached a full score. Of these, 20% didn't randomize the trails, 73,33% failed to describe the way of randomization, and none reported the double-blinded criteria. Furthermore, allocation concealment (99.9%), intention to treat (100%), and patient awareness (100%) were inadequately described. The meta-analysis found no significant difference between regenerative materials and iliac crest graft.

CONCLUSION

This review showed high RoB in CTs implying quality improvement of CTs is necessary. Meta-analysis showed no significant difference between the regenerative materials and autogenous grafts.

Cleft Alveolar Bone Graft Materials: Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

Since the early stages of alveolar bone grafting development, multiple types of materials have been used. Iliac cancellous bone graft (ICBG) remains the gold standard.

DESIGN/METHODS

A review of literature is conducted in order to describe the different bone filling possibilities, autologous or not, and to assess their effectiveness compared to ICBG. This review focused on studies reporting volumetric assessment of the alveolar cleft graft result (by computed tomography scan or cone beam computed tomography).

RESULTS

Grafting materials fall into 3 types: autologous bone grafts, ICBG supplementary material, and bone substitutes. Among autologous materials, no study showed the superiority of any other bone origin over iliac cancellous bone. Yet ICBG gives inconsistent results and presents donor site morbidity. Concerning supplementary material, only 3 studies could show a benefit of adding platelet-rich fibrin (1 study) or platelet-rich plasma (2 studies) to ICBG, which remains controversial in most studies. There is a lack of 3-dimensional (3D) assessment in most articles concerning the use of scaffolds. Only one study showed graft improvement when adding acellular dermal matrix to ICBG. Looking at bone substitutes highlights failures among bioceramics alone, side-effects with bone morphogenetic protein-2 composite materials, and difficulties in cell therapy setup. Studies assessing cell therapy-based substitutes show comparable efficacy with ICBG but remain too few.

CONCLUSION

This review highlights the lack of 3D assessments in the alveolar bone graft materials field. Nothing dethroned ICBG from its position as the gold standard treatment at this time.

Assessment of Bone Formation After Secondary Alveolar Bone Grafting With and Without Platelet-Rich Plasma Using Computer-Aided Engineering Techniques

The aim of this study was to analyze the newly formed bone volume (FV), 6 months after secondary alveoloplasty using iliac cancellous bone graft, with and without platelet-rich plasma (PRP). Forty patients with unilateral alveolar cleft were involved in this randomized, prospective, comparative study, with 20 patients each forming the control (group A) and PRP (group B) groups, respectively. The preoperative alveolar defect volume (DV) and the postoperative FV were automatically calculated by the computer-aided engineering software using the patients' pre and postsurgical computed tomography data. The volume of the actual bone graft (AV) was identical to the DV calculated before surgery. The bone formation ratio (BF%) was calculated as follows: BF% = (FV/AV) × 100%. The mean BF% was 42.54 ± 9.32% in group A and 46.97 ± 18.49% in group B. There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups for BF% (P > 0.05). The study presents a fast and accurate method for assessing the effect of PRP in alveolar grafting. However, the study found no conclusive evidence on the effect of PRP on bone growth.

An Accurate Volumetric Analysis Method for Evaluating Outcomes of Alveolar Cleft Reconstruction

An accurate volumetric analysis method for evaluating the outcomes of different types of alveolar cleft reconstruction is essential because it can help determine which graft material is more effective, confirm favorable times for alveolar bone grafting, and improve surgical techniques. This study aimed to introduce a novel method of precisely calculating the bone formation ratio using computer-aided engineering after surgery. A patient with a unilateral alveolar cleft who was treated with anterior iliac crest bone grafting was enrolled in this study. Helical computed tomography scans were performed preoperatively and 12 months postoperatively. The Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) data were reconstructed as three-dimensional images and saved in the STL format by using Mimics software. STL data were processed by Geomagic Wrap 2017, using the Boolean operation, the newly formed bone of the alveolar was segmented by identifying the differences between the preoperative and the postoperative three-dimensional images. For this patient, the mean volume of the newly formed bone was 0.387 cm, the morphology was clear, the bone formation ratio was 41.4%, the mean time required for calculating the newly formed bone volume was 23 minutes, and the bone survival ratio was 38.7%. This method is a clinically practical, accurately measurement and time-saving method to evaluate the outcome of alveolar cleft reconstruction. Both the volumetric assessment and morphological analysis of the newly formed bone could be determined in a precise manner.

A novel accurate volumetric analysis protocol for evaluating secondary alveolar cleft reconstruction

An accurate volumetric analysis protocol for secondary alveolar cleft reconstruction is essential. It can help confirm favorable times for bone grafting, determine which graft material is more effective, and improve surgical techniques. This study aimed to introduce a novel protocol for precisely calculating the bone formation ratio (BF%) using computer-aided engineering. The helical computed tomography (CT) datasets of 14 patients who underwent alveolar cleft reconstruction was included in this study. CT scans performed preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively were evaluated by two investigators. Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) data were reconstructed as three-dimensional (3D) images using Mimics software and processed by Geomagic Wrap (2017). Using the Boolean operation, the newly formed bone of the alveolar cleft was segmented by identifying the differences between pre- and postoperative 3D images. The volumetric assessment and morphological analysis of the newly formed bone could be determined in a precise manner, the mean BF% was 47.7% ± 16.4%, the mean time required for calculating was 23.57 ± 3.64 min. For the difference in the volume of newly formed bone between the two observers, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.92, p < 0.001. This method is clinically practical and precise measurement, which has good reproducibility for evaluating outcome of different grafting materials for alveolar clefts.

Current methods for secondary alveolar bone grafting assessment in cleft lip and palate patients - A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

The development of 3D X-ray diagnostics has led to new methods for secondary alveolar bone grafting (SABG) assessment. The aim of this study was to collect and present literature from the years 2007-2018, and review on the current treatment outcome assessment methods for SABG.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review of literature from 2007 to 2018 was carried out, following PRISMA guidelines. 426 records were identified after duplicate references had been removed. 25 articles were included in the review. The Cochrane Collaboration tool or the methodological index for non-randomized studies was used for quality evaluation.

RESULTS

Computed tomography and cone beam computed tomography were preferentially used for SABG treatment outcome verification. There were different assessment protocols. Due to the ways in which results were presented, methods were divided into five groups: linear measurements, volumetric measurements, density measurements, percentage ratios, and scales. There was only one randomized, controlled trial with high methodological quality.

CONCLUSIONS

1. Currently, 3D X-ray imaging is a standard treatment outcome verification method for SABG. 2. It is necessary to establish the required postoperative follow-up time for best SABG treatment outcome assessment. More prospective studies to assess bone graft outcomes after 6 months and 1 year are required.

Three-dimensional radiological evaluation of secondary alveolar bone grafting in cleft lip and palate patients: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the existing literature on the three-dimensional (3D) radiological evaluation of secondary alveolar bone grafting (SABG) in cleft lip and palate (CLP) patients, with specific interest in 3D imaging protocols and assessment methods.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search on PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library was conducted. Included publications concerned 3D imaging for evaluation of SABG in CLP patients while articles about primary or tertiary bone grafting or using of two-dimensional images only were excluded. Study quality was evaluated using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies  or the Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing risk of bias.

RESULTS

The search yielded 1735 citations, of which 38 met the inclusion criteria. We noticed a large variability in imaging protocols and bone graft evaluation methods between studies. Most articles were observational studies with medium to low methodological quality, except for the one randomised clinical trial having a low risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a lack of prospective, controlled trials based on a consistent imaging protocol with a sufficiently long follow-up period. A pressing need exists for the development of a consistent optimized imaging protocol for diagnosis and follow up of SABG in CLP patients. Although 3D evaluation methods seem to be more precise than two-dimensional methods, we should be careful when comparing the outcomes arising from different 3D measuring techniques.