A Comparative Evaluation of Soft and Hard Tissue Changes Around Dental Implants Placed With and Without Platelet-Rich Fibrin.

Abstract

A patient's ability to maintain a healthy bone-implant interface seems to be a major predictor of implant longevity over the long term. The implant surface is protected from the oral environment, the bone, and the implant itself by the peri-implant tissues. Platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) has been shown to help in the regeneration of bone and other connective tissues. Since there has been inadequate information on the role of PRF in maintaining soft tissue integrity and crestal bone changes, the present study aimed to evaluate these challenges clinically and radiographically in human patients who had dental implants placed with PRF. There were a total of 15 patients who were recalled for the analysis, and they were split into two groups. PRF was used to complete the implant procedure in the experimental group, but PRF was not used in the control group. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT)was used to evaluate the amount of alveolar bone prior to dental implant placement and intra-oral periapical radiograph (IOPAR) for postoperativeassessment. Gingival index, plaque index, probing depths, papilla bleeding index, and crestal bone changes were used to document clinical limits. IOPAR using a similar approach was used to evaluate the crestal bone level alterations. Patients were evaluated clinically and radiographically for changes in the peri-implant soft tissue and crestal bone during implant placement, sixand nine monthspostoperatively. From baseline (p=0.02) to six months (p=0.04) and nine months (p=0.04), both groups showed changes in crestal bone loss and soft tissue although the changes in the test group were smaller. Soft tissue changes showed significant differences for probing depth and papilla index score at baseline and at the end of the six and nine months (p<0.05), whereas no significant difference was noted with bleeding index and plaque index score during the follow-up (p>0.05). To conclude, the provided data demonstrated that the local injection of PRF during implant placement has the potential to favorably stimulatebone formation, and may be used as a therapeutic adjuvant in the clinical setting of implant placement.