Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Advanced platelet-rich fibrin plus and osseous bone graft for socket preservation and ridge augmentation - A randomized control clinical trial.
Yewale, Manasi; Bhat, Subraya; Kamath, Abhay; Tamrakar, Aditi; Patil, Vathsala; Algal, Adel S.
Afiliación
  • Yewale M; Department of Periodontology, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
  • Bhat S; Department of Periodontology, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
  • Kamath A; Periodontics, College of Dentistry, Imam Abdulrahman Faisal University, Dammam KSA, Saudi Arabia.
  • Tamrakar A; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
  • Patil V; Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
  • Algal AS; Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
J Oral Biol Craniofac Res ; 11(2): 225-233, 2021.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33665072
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical and radiographic effectiveness of A PRF Plus as an adjuctive material to osseous bone graft in socket preservation and ridge augmentation. METHODS: Twenty patients with need to preserve extraction socket in non-molar sites planning for further prosthetic rehabilitation were divided into two groups. Test Group (Group A) was treated with A PRF Plus membrane and Sybograf plus ™ (70% HA and 30 %ß TCP) bone graft. The Control Group (Group B) was treated with Sybograf plus ™ (70% HA and 30% ßTCP) bone graft. Both groups had same socket preservation surgical technique. RESULTS: Both Group A and Group B showed significant improvement in clinical and radiographic parameters. Mean socket length, Vertical Resorption reduction in Group A was 1.48 whereas in Group B was 1.67 which is statistically significant. (p â€‹≤ â€‹0.05). Changes in Horizontal width reduction at 1,3, and 5 â€‹mm depth of the socket for both groups were not statistically significant. The Gain in socket fill for Group A and B 6 months postoperatively was 1185.30HU ± 473.21 and 966.60 HU ± 273.27 respectively. But intergroup comparison was not statistically significant. (p â€‹= â€‹0.17). There were no significant statistical differences in postoperative pain in Group A and Group B as subjects experienced moderate amount of pain. The assessment of post-operative swelling showed that only 30% subjects in Group A reported with swelling. Whereas 80% subjects in Group B complained of post-operative swelling. CONCLUSION: The results of the present study proved utilisation of A PRF Plus as a promising adjunct to conventional regenerative therapy for socket preservation.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials Idioma: En Revista: J Oral Biol Craniofac Res Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: India

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials Idioma: En Revista: J Oral Biol Craniofac Res Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: India