Is the use of platelet-rich fibrin effective in the healing, control of pain, and postoperative bleeding in the palatal area after free gingival graft harvesting? A systematic review of randomized clinical studies

Meza‐Mauricio, Jonathan; Furquim, Camila Pinheiro; Geldres, Antonella; Mendoza‐Azpur, Gerardo; Retamal‐Valdes, Belén; Moraschini, Vittório; Faveri, Marcelo

doi:10.1007/s00784-021-03933-5

Cited by 20 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…in a similarly conducted study 66 . As mentioned above, there is previous systematic review evidence that demonstrates support for the use of PRF after free‐gingival graft harvesting and called for further research with standard PRF parameters and protocols, 27 and this in fact included several of the studies included within the present review 44,82 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

“…There was also a published recognition of the need to standardise reporting of PRF production in the scientific literature. Subsequent systematic reviews have incorporated older, methodologically flawed research 27,28 and have (incompletely) reported on both RCF as well as spin speed, 27 or only the stated RCF or speed in rpm 28 , without explicitly acknowledging the potential downgrading of evidence as a result of indirectness of the intervention (namely, PRF produced using different protocols, with different devices and tubes), as per the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Handbook. 29 The primary aim of this review was to assess the recent clinical trial data relating to the use of PRF, irrespective of centrifugal protocol, in clinical dentistry.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What recent evidence exists to support the use of platelet‐rich fibrin in clinical dentistry? A systematic literature review

Savva

2022

Oral Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Platelet‐rich fibrin (PRF) is a second‐generation platelet concentrate and biomaterial with multiple applications in clinical dentistry. Recent developments in the production of PRF have resulted in several divergent protocols that could be seen to affect the reproducibility and generalisability of the available literature. Additionally, imprecise reporting on PRF production is a further confounding factor with respect to previous trial data. Aims The primary aim of this review was to assess the recent clinical trial data relating to the use of PRF, irrespective of centrifugal protocol, in clinical dentistry. Methods A systematic literature review was carried out in PubMed and the Cochrane Library databases to select English language, human clinical trials involving the use of PRF published between July 2018 and July 2021. Results The 50 included studies demonstrated an overall clinical benefit for the use of PRF in the fields of oral medicine, oral surgery and periodontology, with unclear benefits in the field of endodontology, and no clear benefit in the field of orthodontics. Only 16% of the included studies met published standards for reporting PRF production protocols, and meeting such standards should be an essential requirement for future publications. Conclusions There was little direct evidence to support one particular PRF protocol over another and this remains an area of controversy. Future research should focus on precise reporting of PRF protocols, and in areas where PRF is of known benefit, the use of different production methods should be compared to assess what, if any, clinical significance is attached to particular centrifugation protocols and tubes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

What recent evidence exists to support the use of platelet‐rich fibrin in clinical dentistry? A systematic literature review

Savva

2022

Oral Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Palatal donor sites of free gingival and connective tissue grafts provide great discomfort for patients. Patient-related outcome measures are significantly improved by the application of PRF as an alternative, as less pain and less bleeding are reported, and soft tissue healing appears to be equal or even improved [ 41 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Growth Factor Release within Liquid and Solid PRF

Zwittnig

Kirnbauer

Jakse

et al. 2022

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: The purpose of this study was to obtain data concerning growth factor release within liquid and solid platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) matrices and to estimate the amount of potential interindividual variations as a basis for further preclinical and clinical trials. Therefore, we aimed to determine possible differences in the release of growth factors between liquid and solid PRF. Materials and Methods: Blood samples obtained from four subjects were processed to both liquid and solid PRF matrices using a standard centrifugation protocol. Five growth factors (vascular endothelial growth factor, VEGF; epidermal growth factor, EGF; platelet-derived growth factor-BB, PDGF-BB; transforming growth factor-β1, TGF-β1; and matrix metallopeptidase 9, MMP-9) have been evaluated at six time points by ELISA over a total observation period of 10 days (1 h, 7 h, 1 d, 2 d, 7 d, and 10 d). Results: Growth factor release could be measured in all samples at each time point. Comparing liquid and solid PRF matrices, no significant differences were detected (p > 0.05). The mean release of VEGF, TGFβ-1, PDGF-BB, and MMP-9 raised to a peak at time point five (day 7) in both liquid and solid PRF matrices. VEGF release was lower in liquid PRF than in solid PRF, whereas those of PDGF-BB and MMP-9 were higher in liquid PRF than in solid PRF at all time points. EGF had its peak release already at time point two after 7 h in liquid and solid matrices (hour 7 EGF solid: mean = 180 pg/mL, SD = 81; EGF liquid: mean = 218 pg/mL, SD = 64), declined rapidly until day 2, and had a second slight peak on day 7 in both groups (day 7 EGF solid: mean = 182 pg/mL, SD = 189; EGF liquid: mean = 81 pg/mL, SD = 70). Conclusions: This study detected growth factor release within liquid and solid PRF matrices with little variations. Further preclinical trials are needed to precisely analyze the growth factor release in larger samples and to better understand their effects on wound healing in different clinical indications.

show abstract

“…After completion of graft dissection, the wound in the donor site is protected. Different techniques have been proposed-sutures, absorbable gelatin sponge, cyanoacrylate bioadhesive, periodontal dressing, palatal stents, platelet-rich fibrin, or a combination of some of the aforementioned techniques (Figures 23-34) [25,26,52,54,94,95].…”

Section: Donor Site Preparationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peri-Implant Soft Tissue Augmentation

Blašković¹,

Blašković²

2022

Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The peri-implant soft tissue (PIS) augmentation procedure has become an integral part of implant-prosthetic rehabilitation. Minimal width of keratinized mucosa (KM) of 2 mm is deemed necessary to facilitate oral hygiene maintenance around the implant and provide hard and soft peri-implant tissue stability. PIS thickness of at least 2 mm is recommended to achieve the esthetic appearance and prevent recessions around implant prosthetic rehabilitation. The autogenous soft tissue grafts can be divided into two groups based on their histological composition—free gingival graft (FGG) and connective tissue graft (CTG). FGG graft is used mainly to increase the width of keratinized mucosa while CTG augment the thickness of PIS. Both grafts are harvested from the same anatomical region—the palate. Alternatively, they can be harvested from the maxillary tuberosity. Soft tissue grafts can be also harvested as pedicle grafts, in case when the soft tissue graft remains attached to the donor site by one side preserving the blood supply from the donor region. Clinically this will result in less shrinkage of the graft postoperatively, improving the outcome of the augmentation procedure. To bypass the drawback connected with FGG or CTG harvesting, substitutional soft tissue grafts have been developed.

show abstract

Is the use of platelet-rich fibrin effective in the healing, control of pain, and postoperative bleeding in the palatal area after free gingival graft harvesting? A systematic review of randomized clinical studies

Cited by 20 publications

References 40 publications

What recent evidence exists to support the use of platelet‐rich fibrin in clinical dentistry? A systematic literature review

What recent evidence exists to support the use of platelet‐rich fibrin in clinical dentistry? A systematic literature review

Growth Factor Release within Liquid and Solid PRF

Peri-Implant Soft Tissue Augmentation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About