The impact of the centrifuge characteristics and centrifugation protocols on the cells, growth factors, and fibrin architecture of a leukocyte- and platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) clot and membrane.

L-PRF (leukocyte- and platelet-rich fibrin) is one of the four families of platelet concentrates for surgical use and is widely used in oral and maxillofacial regenerative therapies. The first objective of this article was to evaluate the mechanical vibrations appearing during centrifugation in four models of commercially available table-top centrifuges used to produce L-PRF and the impact of the centrifuge characteristics on the cell and fibrin architecture of a L-PRF clot and membrane. The second objective of this article was to evaluate how changing some parameters of the L-PRF protocol may influence its biological signature, independently from the characteristics of the centrifuge. In the first part, four different commercially available centrifuges were used to produce L-PRF, following the original L-PRF production method (glass-coated plastic tubes, 400 g force, 12 minutes). The tested systems were the original L-PRF centrifuge (Intra-Spin, Intra-Lock, the only CE and FDA cleared system for the preparation of L-PRF) and three other laboratory centrifuges (not CE/FDA cleared for L-PRF): A-PRF 12 (Advanced PRF, Process), LW-UPD8 (LW Scientific) and Salvin 1310 (Salvin Dental). Each centrifuge was opened for inspection, two accelerometers were installed (one radial, one vertical), and data were collected with a spectrum analyzer in two configurations (full-load or half load). All clots and membranes were collected into a sterile surgical box (Xpression kit, Intra-Lock). The exact macroscopic (weights, sizes) and microscopic (photonic and scanning electron microscopy SEM) characteristics of the L-PRF produced with these four different machines were evaluated. In the second part, venous blood was taken in two groups, respectively, Intra-Spin 9 ml glass-coated plastic tubes (Intra-Lock) and A-PRF 10 ml glass tubes (Process). Tubes were immediately centrifuged at 2700 rpm (around 400 g) during 12 minutes to produce L-PRF or at 1500 rpm during 14 minutes to produce A-PRF. All centrifugations were done using the original L-PRF centrifuge (Intra-Spin), as recommended by the two manufacturers. Half of the membranes were placed individually in culture media and transferred in a new tube at seven experimental times (up to 7 days). The releases of transforming growth factor ß-1 (TGFß-1), platelet derived growth factor AB (PDGF-AB), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and bone morphogenetic protein 2 (BMP-2) were quantified using ELISA kits at these seven experimental times. The remaining membranes were used to evaluate the initial quantity of growth factors of the L-PRF and A-PRF membranes, through forcible extraction. Very significant differences in the level of vibrations at each rotational speed were observed between the four tested centrifuges. The original L-PRF centrifuge (Intra-Spin) was by far the most stable machine in all configurations and always remained under the threshold of resonance, unlike the three other tested machines. At the classical speed of production of L-PRF, the level of undesirable vibrations on the original centrifuge was between 4.5 and 6 times lower than with other centrifuges. Intra-Spin showed the lowest temperature of the tubes. A-PRF and Salvin were both associated with a significant increase in temperature in the tube. Intra-Spin produced the heaviest clot and quantity of exudate among the four techniques. A-PRF and LW produced much lighter, shorter and narrower clots and membranes than the two other centrifuges. Light microscopy analysis showed relatively similar features for all L-PRF types (concentration of cell bodies in the first half). However, SEM illustrated considerable differences between samples. The original Intra-Spin L-PRF showed a strongly polymerized thick fibrin matrix and all cells appeared alive with a normal shape, including the textured surface aspect of activated lymphocytes. The A-PRF, Salvin and LW PRF-like membranes presented a lightly polymerized slim fibrin gel and most of the visible cell bodies appeared destroyed (squashed or shrunk). In the second part of this study, the slow release of the three tested growth factors from original L-PRF membranes was significantly stronger (more than twice stronger, p<0.001) at all experimental times than the release from A-PRF membranes. No trace of BMP2 could be detected in the A-PRF. A slow release of BMP2 was detected during at least 7 days in the original L-PRF. Moreover, the original L-PRF clots and membranes (produced with 9 mL blood) were always significantly larger than the A-PRF (produced with 10 mL blood). The A-PRF membranes dissolved in vitro after less than 3 days, while the L-PRF membrane remained in good shape during at least 7 days. Each centrifuge has its clear own profile of vibrations depending on the rotational speed, and the centrifuge characteristics are directly impacting the architecture and cell content of a L-PRF clot. This result may reveal a considerable flaw in all the PRP/PRF literature, as this parameter was never considered. The original L-PRF clot (Intra-Spin) presented very specific characteristics, which appeared distorted when using centrifuges with a higher vibration level. A-PRF, LW and Salvin centrifuges produced PRF-like materials with a damaged and almost destroyed cell population through the standard protocol, and it is therefore impossible to classify these products in the L-PRF family. Moreover, when using the same centrifuge, the original L-PRF protocol allowed producing larger clots/membranes and a more intense release of growth factors (biological signature at least twice stronger) than the modified A-PRF protocol. Both protocols are therefore significantly different, and the clinical and experimental results from the original L-PRF shall not be extrapolated to the A-PRF. Finally, the comparison between the total released amounts and the initial content of the membrane (after forcible extraction) highlighted that the leukocytes living in the fibrin matrix are involved in the production of significant amounts of growth factors. The centrifuge characteristics and centrifugation protocols impact significantly and dramatically the cells, growth factors and fibrin architecture of L-PRF.

Leucocyte- and platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) as a regenerative medicine strategy for the treatment of refractory leg ulcers: a prospective cohort study.

Chronic wounds (VLU: venous leg ulcer, DFU: diabetic foot ulcer, PU: pressure ulcer, or complex wounds) affect a significant proportion of the population. Despite appropriate standard wound care, such ulcers unfortunately may remain open for months or even years. The use of leukocyte- and platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) to cure skin ulcers is a simple and inexpensive method, widely used in some countries but unknown or neglected in most others. This auto-controlled prospective cohort study explored and quantified accurately for the first time the adjunctive benefits of topical applications of L-PRF in the management of such refractory ulcers in a diverse group of patients. Forty-four consecutive patients with VLUs (n = 28, 32 wounds: 17 ≤ 10 cm2 and 15 > 10 cm2), DPUs (n = 9, 10 wounds), PUs (n = 5), or complex wounds (n = 2), all refractory to standard treatment for ≥3 months, received a weekly application of L-PRF membranes. L-PRF was prepared following the original L-PRF method developed more than 15 years ago (400g, 12 minutes) using the Intra-Spin L-PRF centrifuge/system and the XPression box kit (Intra-Lock, Boca Raton, FL, USA; the only CE/FDA cleared system for the preparation of L-PRF). Changes in wound area were recorded longitudinally via digital planimetry. Adverse events and pain levels were also registered. All wounds showed significant improvements after the L-PRF therapy. All VLUs ≤ 10 cm2, all DFUs, as well as the two complex wounds showed full closure within a 3-month period. All wounds of patients with VLUs > 10 cm2 who continued therapy (10 wounds) could be closed, whereas in the five patients who discontinued therapy improvement of wound size was observed. Two out of the five PUs were closed, with improvement in the remaining three patients who again interrupted therapy (surface evolution from 7.35 ± 4.31 cm2 to 5.78 ± 3.81 cm2). No adverse events were observed. A topical application of L-PRF on chronic ulcers, recalcitrant to standard wound care, promotes healing and wound closure in all patients following the treatment. This new therapy is simple, safe and inexpensive, and should be considered a relevant therapeutic option for all refractory skin ulcers.

Molecular, Cellular and Pharmaceutical Aspects of Biomaterials in Dentistry and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. An Internationalization of Higher Education and Research Perspective.

In dentistry and oral and maxillofacial surgery, the development of implantable biomaterials and the understanding of their molecular, cellular and pharmaceutical aspects are currently major fields of research and education, with a considerable impact on the daily clinical practice and the evolution of therapeutic strategies. In the era of globalized economy of knowledge and science, this scientific domain needs the development of global cooperation and a paradigm evolution in the organizational culture of the dental sciences and related dental industry. Despite political pressure and theoretical efforts, the internationalization of higher education and research today in dentistry and biomaterials remains in general quite superficial and mostly dependent on the efforts of a few leaders of internationalization working through their personal networks, as it was assessed through the FAST scores (Fast Assessment Screening Test) calculated in various dental schools and groups worldwide through the ISAIAS program (Intercultural Sensitivity Academic Index &Advanced Standards). Cooperation in a multipolar multicultural community requires the development of strong intercultural competences, and this process remains limited in most institutions. These limits of international scientific cooperation can be observed through different markers, particularly the difficult and limited production of ISO standards (International Organization for Standardization) and the relatively low SCIENTI scores (Scientific Cooperation Internationalization Effort &Network Test &Index) of the specialized dental literature, particularly in comparison to the most significant medical literature. However, as an analytical tool to assess the scientific international cooperation effort between fields and periods, the SCIENTI screening system also highlighted a significant increase of the internationalization effort in the last years in the best dental biomaterials publications. Finally, an internationalization of higher education and research perspective is a very important approach to assess the evolution of the dental biomaterial science and highlights very clearly the future endeavors of this field, particularly the impact and interferences of private entities and companies in the development of this corpus of knowledge. It also reveals that the concept of independent not-for-profit Cooperation Internationalization Effort Literature (CIEL), in the various informal models that can be found worldwide around diverse leaderships, is the best perspective for a better science and understanding of molecular, cellular and pharmaceutical aspects of biomaterials in dentistry and oral and maxillofacial surgery.

Clinical Application of Mesenchymal Stem Cells and Novel Supportive Therapies for Oral Bone Regeneration.

Bone regeneration is often needed prior to dental implant treatment due to the lack of adequate quantity and quality of the bone after infectious diseases, trauma, tumor, or congenital conditions. In these situations, cell transplantation technologies may help to overcome the limitations of autografts, xenografts, allografts, and alloplastic materials. A database search was conducted to include human clinical trials (randomized or controlled) and case reports/series describing the clinical use of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) in the oral cavity for bone regeneration only specifically excluding periodontal regeneration. Additionally, novel advances in related technologies are also described. 190 records were identified. 51 articles were selected for full-text assessment, and only 28 met the inclusion criteria: 9 case series, 10 case reports, and 9 randomized controlled clinical trials. Collectively, they evaluate the use of MSCs in a total of 290 patients in 342 interventions. The current published literature is very diverse in methodology and measurement of outcomes. Moreover, the clinical significance is limited. Therefore, the use of these techniques should be further studied in more challenging clinical scenarios with well-designed and standardized RCTs, potentially in combination with new scaffolding techniques and bioactive molecules to improve the final outcomes.

Classification of platelet concentrates (Platelet-Rich Plasma-PRP, Platelet-Rich Fibrin-PRF) for topical and infiltrative use in orthopedic and sports medicine: current consensus, clinical implications and perspectives.

Platelet concentrates for topical and infiltrative use - commonly termed Platetet-Rich Plasma (PRP) or Platelet-Rich Fibrin (PRF) - are used or tested as surgical adjuvants or regenerative medicine preparations in most medical fields, particularly in sports medicine and orthopaedic surgery. Even if these products offer interesting therapeutic perspectives, their clinical relevance is largely debated, as the literature on the topic is often confused and contradictory. The long history of these products was always associated with confusions, mostly related to the lack of consensual terminology, characterization and classification of the many products that were tested in the last 40 years. The current consensus is based on a simple classification system dividing the many products in 4 main families, based on their fibrin architecture and cell content: Pure Platelet-Rich Plasma (P-PRP), such as the PRGF-Endoret technique; Leukocyte- and Platelet-Rich Plasma (LPRP), such as Biomet GPS system; Pure Platelet-Rich Fibrin (P-PRF), such as Fibrinet; Leukocyte- and Platelet-Rich Fibrin (L-PRF), such as Intra-Spin L-PRF. The 4 main families of products present different biological signatures and mechanisms, and obvious differences for clinical applications. This classification serves as a basis for further investigations of the effects of these products. Perspectives of evolutions of this classification and terminology are also discussed, particularly concerning the impact of the cell content, preservation and activation on these products in sports medicine and orthopaedics.

The peri-implantitis: implant surfaces, microstructure, and physicochemical aspects.

There are two ways of looking at secondary failures of osseointegration; one is to reflect on possible causes for the failure, the other focuses on the pathology per se. In the first case, background factors such as mechanical trauma (adverse loading) or inflammations/infections are being discussed as the cause of failure. Then peri-implantitis is a term reserved for implant disturbance due to inflammation/infections only. However, irrespective of the original reason for the failure being adverse loading or inflammation/infection, the end result with bone resorption and inflammation may be very similar. Hence, in the present article, an alternative outlook has been chosen. Trigerring factors for peri-implantitis are generally gathered under four categories: lesions of peri-implant attachment, presence of aggressive bacteria, excessive mechanical stress, and corrosion. If only one of these factors would start a chain reaction leading to lesions, then the other factors may combine to worsen the condition. With other words, peri-implantitis is a general term dependent on a synergy of several factors, irrespective of the precise reason for first triggering off symptoms.

L-PRP/L-PRF in esthetic plastic surgery, regenerative medicine of the skin and chronic wounds.

The use of platelet concentrates for topical use is of particular interest for the promotion of skin wound healing. Fibrin-based surgical adjuvants are indeed widely used in plastic surgery since many years in order to improve scar healing and wound closure. However, the addition of platelets and their associated growth factors opened a new range of possibilities, particularly for the treatment of chronic skin ulcers and other applications of regenerative medicine on the covering tissues. In the 4 families of platelet concentrates available, 2 families were particularly used and tested in this clinical field: L-PRP (Leukocyte- and Platelet-rich Plasma) and L-PRF (Leukocyte- and Platelet-Rich Fibrin). These 2 families have in common the presence of significant concentrations of leukocytes, and these cells are important in the local cleaning and immune regulation of the wound healing process. The main difference between them is the fibrin architecture, and this parameter considerably influences the healing potential and the therapeutical protocol associated to each platelet concentrate technology. In this article, we describe the historical evolutions of these techniques from the fibrin glues to the current L-PRP and L-PRF, and discuss the important functions of the platelet growth factors, the leukocyte content and the fibrin architecture in order to optimize the numerous potential applications of these products in regenerative medicine of the skin. Many outstanding perspectives are appearing in this field and require further research.

Current knowledge and perspectives for the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) in oral and maxillofacial surgery part 2: Bone graft, implant and reconstructive surgery.

Platelet concentrates for surgical use are innovative tools of regenerative medicine, and were widely tested in oral and maxillofacial surgery. Unfortunately, the literature on the topic is contradictory and the published data are difficult to sort and interpret. In bone graft, implant and reconstructive surgery, the literature is particularly dense about the use of the various forms of Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) - Pure Platelet-Rich Plasma (P-PRP) or Leukocyte- and Platelet-Rich Plasma (L-PRP) - but still limited about Platelet-Rich Fibrin (PRF) subfamilies. In this second article, we describe and discuss the current published knowledge about the use of PRP and PRF during implant placement (particularly as surface treatment for the stimulation of osseointegration), the treatment of peri-implant bone defects (after peri-implantitis, during implantation in an insufficient bone volume or during immediate post-extraction or post-avulsion implantation), the sinuslift procedures and various complex implant-supported treatments. Other potential applications of the platelet concentrates are also highlighted in maxillofacial reconstructive surgery, for the treatment of patients using bisphosphonates, anticoagulants or with post-tumoral irradiated maxilla. Finally, we particularly insist on the perspectives in this field, through the description and illustration of the use of L-PRF (Leukocyte- and Platelet-Rich Fibrin) clots and membranes during the regeneration of peri-implant bone defects, during the sinus-lift procedure and during complex implant-supported rehabilitations. The use of L-PRF allowed to define a new therapeutic concept called the Natural Bone Regeneration (NBR) for the reconstruction of the alveolar ridges at the gingival and bone levels. As it is illustrated in this article, the NBR principles allow to push away some technical limits of global implant-supported rehabilitations, particularly when combined with other powerful biotechnological tools: metronidazole solution, adequate bone substitutes and improved implant designs and surfaces (for example here AstraTech Osseospeed or Intra-Lock Ossean implants). As a general conclusion, we are currently living a transition period in the use of PRP and PRF in oral and maxillofacial surgery. PRPs failed to prove strong strategic advantages that could justify their use in daily practice, and the use of most PRP techniques will probably be limited to some very specific applications where satisfactory results have been reached. Only a few simple, inexpensive and efficient techniques such as the L-PRF will continue to develop in oral and maxillofacial surgery in the next years. This natural evolution illustrates that clinical sciences need concrete and practical solutions, and not hypothetical benefits. The history of platelet concentrates in oral and maxillofacial surgery finally demonstrates also how the techniques evolve and sometimes promote the definition of new therapeutical concepts and clinical protocols in the today's era of regenerative medicine.