Liquid Platelet-Rich Fibrin Coating Implant Surface to Enhance Osseointegration: A Double-Blinded, Randomized Split-Mouth Trial with 1-Year Follow-up
- Autores: Gustavo Vicentis de Oliveira Fernandes, Nuno Bernardo Malta Santos, Manuel Fernando Correia de Sousa, Juliana Campos Hasse Fernandes
- Localización: The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, ISSN-e 0882-2786, Vol. 37, Nº. 1, 2022, págs. 159-170
- Idioma: inglés
- Enlaces
-
Resumen
Purpose: The goal of this study was to assess the effect of a liquid platelet-rich fibrin (PRF)-coated implant surface (double acid-etched) on osseointegration, analyzing the stability and the possibility of shortening the rehabilitation period.
Materials and methods: Initially, the blood was centrifuged to obtain the liquid PRF (2,000 revolutions per minute [rpm], 10 minutes), dividing a sample to be analyzed by Luminex, and another was applied onto the implant surface. Fifteen patients (30 implants) were divided into two groups (control and liquid PRF). Following the recommendation provided by the manufacturer, within a controlled torque at a maximum of 34 N.mm, the implant was placed. All patients had 1 year of follow-up.
Results: Eleven analytes were identified for the sample characterization (IP-10, eotaxin, RANTES, macrophage inflammatory protein 1-beta [MIP-1β], VEGF, PDGF-BB, bFGF, IFN-γ, interleukin [IL]-5, IL-10, and IL-15). Regarding clinical evaluation, for control and liquid PRF groups, respectively, (1) the mean torque for implant placement was 26.67 and 27.27 N.mm; (2) the initial stability (implant stability quotient [ISQ]) was 64.87 (SD ± 6.01) and 67.36 (SD ± 7.21); (3) the final ISQ was 67.67 (SD ± 6.13) and 70.14 (SD ± 6.40); (4) it took an average 73 and 71 days to reestablish the masticatory function; (5) the survival rate was 93.3% and 86.6%; and (6) the marginal bone loss was up to 1.0 mm after 1 year (control)-for two patients, it was between 1.0 and 2.0 mm, and for another two subjects, it was up to 1 mm (liquid PRF). No statistical significance was observed for all parameters analyzed (P > .05).
Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, the results indicated that there was no statistical significance when liquid PRF was applied on the implant surface, for all parameters.
