Efficacy of platelet-rich plasma applied to post-extraction retained lower third molar alveoli. A systematic review

Do blood concentrates influence inflammatory signs and symptoms after mandibular third molar surgery? A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

OBJECTIVES

To investigate, through a network meta-analysis, the effectiveness of blood concentrates in reducing pain perception, trismus, and edema after mandibular third molar extraction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic search was performed in nine databases to locate randomized clinical trials comparing blood concentrate use after mandibular third molar extraction. Two authors selected and extracted the data independently. The individual risk of bias in the studies was assessed with the RoB v2.0 tool. A network meta-analysis compared postoperative pain and trismus scores after applying different blood concentrates, using the mean difference (MD) as an effect estimate. The GRADE approach assessed the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

Thirty-one randomized clinical trials were included in the review and 18 in the meta-analysis. Leukocyte- and platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) was the most used blood concentrate, followed by platelet-rich plasma (PRP). The network meta-analysis, depending on the analyzed period, evaluated up to 1240 surgeries. Among the analyzed blood concentrates, advanced platelet-rich fibrin (A-PRF) performed better among the analyzed blood concentrates, decreasing postoperative pain in 1, 2, 3, and 7 days and reducing trismus up to the inflammatory peak compared to blood clots. Only two studies had a low risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on very low certainty of evidence, using concentrates seemed efficient compared to blood clots in reducing pain and trismus after mandibular third molar surgeries. A-PRF decreased postoperative pain throughout the evaluated time and trismus during the acute inflammatory peak.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

A-PRF after mandibular third molar extractions performed better among the analyzed blood concentrates and seemed efficient in improving postoperative quality by decreasing inflammatory signs and symptoms.

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.

The effects of lyophilised platelet-rich plasma in third molar extraction sockets and its surrounding tissues

Objective

To determine the effects of repeated placement of quantified lyophilised platelet-rich plasma (LPRP) on the soft and hard tissue components.

Methods

Lyophilised platelet-rich plasma was topically placed, and later injected, into fresh sockets using the third molar surgical model, randomised according to the split-mouth approach. The control site received placebo. The application of LPRP was done intraoperatively, one month and two months postoperatively. The measured endpoints included post-operative pain, swelling, trismus, pocket depth at mid-distal adjacent second molar, soft tissue healing, and bone formation (which was assessed radiographically). Fifteen healthy young adults, aged between 21 and 35 years, visiting the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Clinic at the University of Malaya were recruited for this study.

Results

There was no significant difference in post-operative pain, swelling size, trismus, and bone healing within their specific timelines during this study. However, the LPRP group showed significant reduction in pocket depth at the two-month post-operative period, suggesting that LPRP improves soft tissue healing.

Conclusion

Soft tissue healing, measured as the change of periodontal pocket depth, showed significant reduction, suggesting the benefit of LPRP for soft tissue healing. However, bone regeneration and reduction of post-operative sequelae showed no improvement even after quantification and repeated LPRP application.

Third molar surgery: Past, present, and the future

Third molar surgery is the most common ambulatory procedure done by oral and maxillofacial surgeons. Surgical approaches for the removal of third molars have been published since the 20th century. This article reviews the history and development of extraction techniques through a literature review. The literature was selected through a search of an electronic database. Key words for the Medline search were "mandibular/maxillary third molar," "impacted mandibular/maxillary third molar," "mandibular/maxillary third molar flap design," and "mandibular/maxillary third molar incision." The search was restricted to English-language articles. Additionally, a manual search in the major oral surgery journals and books was performed. The aim of this article is to examine the evolution of third molar surgery, recognize pioneering techniques, and compare these techniques to current approaches. Common approaches employed today are discussed and treatment philosophies with thoughts for future therapies are provided.

Platelet rich plasma in oral and maxillofacial surgery from the perspective of composition

The application of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in oral and maxillofacial surgery has been thoroughly studied in the last two decades. Currently, different types of PRP are applied in the clinical practice, being the presence or absence of leukocytes one of the classification criteria. However, there is poor evidence assessing the influence of the PRP composition in their efficacy. In this context, the aim of this narrative review is to compile the existing evidence covering the efficacy of PRP in oral and maxillofacial surgery, starting from a systematic literature search and to qualitatively describe the efficacy outcomes from the composition perspective. According to the results of this review, the application of PRP in oral and maxillofacial surgery is a potential strategy to improve soft- and hard-tissue regeneration, observing differences in the efficacy of PRP depending on its composition and the studied application. P-PRP (the absence of leukocytes) has been more consistent in achieving beneficial effects in alveolar ridge preservation, management of post-extraction complications, bone augmentation and temporomandibular joint disorders. For that, the composition and methodology used to prepare the PRP should be a critical point when evaluating the efficacy of PRP.

Efficacy of platelet-rich plasma for non-transfusion use: Overview of systematic reviews

INTRODUCTION

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is a blood component therapy with a supraphysiological concentration of platelets derived from allogenic or, more commonly, autologous blood. PRP has been used in different non-transfusion indications because of its role in the promotion of tissue repair and healing, in fields such as Traumatology, Dermatology and Dentistry.

OBJECTIVE

To provide a synthesis of the efficacy of PRP for different clinical situations.

METHODS

Systematic searches were carried out in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and LILACS in July 2018 to identify systematic reviews (SRs) of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) focusing on PRP for non-transfusion use. Two authors independently screened all retrieved references in two stages (titles and abstracts at a first stage and full texts at a second stage). The methodological quality of SRs that met the eligibility criteria was appraised by AMSTAR 2. Conclusions were based on the most recent SRs with highest quality.

RESULTS

One thousand two hundred and forty references were retrieved. After checking the inclusion criteria, 29 SRs of RCTs related to three different fields (wound care, Orthopedics and Dentistry) were included. The results suggest the benefit of PRP for different clinical situations, such as diabetic wounds, acute lesions of musculoskeletal system, rotator cuff lesions, tendinopathies, knee and hip osteoarthritis, total knee arthroplasty, allogenic bone graft for dental implants and periodontal intrabony defects.

CONCLUSION

There is low to moderate quality evidence supporting the efficacy of PRP for specific clinical situations. The low quality of the evidence limits the certainty of these findings. Well-planned and well-conducted RCTs are still needed to further assess the efficacy of PRP.

Angiogenesis and the prevention of alveolar osteitis: a review study

Angiogenesis is one of the essential processes that occur during wound healing. It is responsible for providing immunity as well as the regenerative cells, nutrition, and oxygen needed for the healing of the alveolar socket following tooth extraction. The inappropriate removal of formed blood clots causes the undesirable phenomenon of alveolar osteitis (AO) or dry socket. In this review, we aimed to investigate whether enhanced angiogenesis contributes to a more effective prevention of AO. The potential pro- or anti-angiogenic activity of different materials used for the treatment of AO were evaluated. An electronic search was performed in the PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases via OVID from January 2000 to September 2016 using the keywords mentioned in the PubMed and MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) terms regarding the role of angiogenesis in the prevention of AO. Our initial search identified 408 articles using the keywords indicated above, with 38 of them meeting the inclusion criteria set for this review. Due to the undeniable role of angiogenesis in the socket healing process, it is beneficial if strategies for preventing AO are directed toward more proangiogenic materials and modalities.

Efficacy of different methods used for dry socket prevention and risk factor analysis: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Dry socket is one of the most common complications that develops after the extraction of a permanent tooth, and its prevention is more effective than its treatment.

OBJECTIVES

Analyze the efficacy of different methods used in preventing dry socket in order to decrease its incidence after tooth extraction.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A Cochrane and PubMed-MEDLINE database search was conducted with the search terms "dry socket", "prevention", "risk factors", "alveolar osteitis" and "fibrynolitic alveolitis", both individually and using the Boolean operator "AND". The inclusion criteria were: clinical studies including at least 30 patients, articles published from 2005 to 2015 and written in English. The exclusion criteria were case reports and nonhuman studies.

RESULTS

30 publications were selected from a total of 250. Six of the 30 were excluded after reading the full text. The final review included 24 articles: 9 prospective studies, 2 retrospective studies and 13 clinical trials. They were stratified according to their level of scientific evidence using SIGN criteria (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network).

CONCLUSIONS

All treatments included in the review were aimed at decreasing the incidence of dry socket. Locally administering chlorhexidine or applying platelet-rich plasma reduces the likelihood of developing this complication. Antibiotic prescription does not avoid postoperative complications after lower third molar surgery. With regard to risk factors, all of the articles selected suggest that patient age, history of previous infection and the difficulty of the extraction are the most common predisposing factors for developing dry socket. There is no consensus that smoking, gender or menstrual cycles are risk factors. Taking the scientific quality of the articles evaluated into account, a level B recommendation has been given for the proposed-procedures in the prevention of dry socket.