Impact of autologous platelet concentrates on the osseointegration of dental implants.

Osseointegration is defined as the direct deposition of bone onto biomaterial devices, most commonly composed from titanium, for the purpose of anchoring dental prostheses. The use of autologous platelet concentrates (APC) has the potential to enhance this process by modifying the interface between the host and the surface of the titanium implant. The rationale is to modify the implant surface and implant-bone interface via "biomimicry," a process whereby the deposition of the host's own proteins and extracellular matrix enhances the biocompatibility of the implant and hence accelerates the osteogenic healing process. This review of the available evidence reporting on the effect of APC on osseointegration explores in vitro laboratory studies of the interaction of APC with different implant surfaces, as well as the in vivo and clinical effects of APC on osseointegration in animal and human studies. The inherent variability associated with using autologous products, namely the unique composition of each individual's blood plasma, as well as the great variety in APC protocols, combination of biomaterials, and clinical/therapeutic application, makes it is difficult to make any firm conclusions about the in vivo and clinical effects of APC on osseointegration. The available evidence suggests that the clinical benefits of adding PRP and the liquid form of L-PRF (liquid fibrinogen) to any implant surface appear to be limited. The application of L-PRF membranes in the osteotomy site, however, may produce positive clinical effects at the early stage of healing (up to 6 weeks), by promoting early implant stability and reducing marginal bone loss, although no positive longer term effects were observed. Careful interpretation and cautious conclusions should be drawn from these findings as there were various limitations in methodology. Future studies should focus on better understanding of the influence of APCs on the biomaterial surface and designing controlled preclinical and clinical studies using standardized APC preparation and application protocols.

Systematic Comparison of the Effect of Four Clinical-Grade Platelet Rich Hemoderivatives on Osteoblast Behaviour.

Hemoderivatives have utilized in an empirical manner, driven by clinical considerations, leading to the development of a plethora of manufacturing protocols. The purpose of this study was to investigate the composition and bioactivity of four common clinical-grade hemoderivates prepared using standardised methods. Four different hemoderivatives were obtained from sheep blood and divided into two groups: A-PRF/i-PRF (fresh) and P-PRP/L-PRP (anticoagulated). Thrombus (CLOT) was used as a control. Thrombocyte quantification, growth factor composition (IGF-I, VEGF, PDGF-BB, BMP-2), cell viability, migration and mineralization assay were evaluated. Platelet recovery was superior for L-PRP followed by P-PRP. A significant cumulative release of IGF-I and PDGF-BB was noted for A-PRF and L-PRP groups at early time points. Similar release profiles of BMP-2 and VEGF were noted in all protocols. Cell viability and migration assay have demonstrated a detrimental effect when the concentration was ≥60%. Moreover, at Day 21, i-PRF have demonstrated superior mineralisation properties when compared to all groups. A negative impact of A-PRF was demonstrated at high concentrations. Despite its low content in growth factors, i-PRF was the best performing blood product for inducing osteoblast mineralisation, and therefore could be the candidate of choice for utilisation in bone tissue engineering applications.

A Clinical Risk Assessment of a 3D-Printed Patient-Specific Scaffold by Failure Modes and Effects Analysis.

This study aims to carry out a risk assessment to identify and rectify potential clinical risks of a 3D-printed patient-specific scaffold for large-volume alveolar bone regeneration. A survey was used to assess clinicians' perceptions regarding the use of scaffolds in the treatment of alveolar defects and conduct a clinical risk assessment of the developed scaffold using the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) framework. The response rate was 69.4% with a total of 41 responses received. Two particular failure modes were identified as a high priority through the clinical risk assessment conducted. The highest mean Risk Priority Number was obtained by "failure of healing due to patient risk factors" (45.7 ± 27.7), followed by "insufficient soft tissue area" (37.8 ± 24.1). Despite the rapid developments, finding a scaffold that is both biodegradable and tailored to the patient's specific defect in cases of large-volume bone regeneration is still challenging for clinicians. Our results indicate a positive perception of clinicians towards this novel scaffold. The FMEA clinical risk assessment has revealed two failure modes that should be prioritized for risk mitigation (safe clinical translation). These findings are important for the safe transition to in-human trials and subsequent clinical use.