West China College of Stomatology, State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Department of Imaging & Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, OMFS IMPATH Research Group, KU Leuven and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019 Dec;30(12):1190-1199. doi: 10.1111/clr.13532. Epub 2019 Sep 20.
To evaluate the peri-implant trabecular bone volume and architecture changes with 6-month follow-up after local application of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and platelet-poor plasma (PPP) using high-resolution micro-CT.
Seventy-two dental implants were placed into healed mandibular sites of 9 beagle dogs. Implants were randomly divided into 4 groups following a split-mouth design: control I; control II; PPP; and PRP. Primary and secondary stabilities were assessed using resonance frequency analyses. At 1, 3, and 6 months after implant loading, trabecular structural parameters were evaluated at 0.5, 1, and 1.5 mm away from implants using micro-CT (voxel = 20 μm).
Primary and secondary stabilities were equivalent in all conditions. PPP and PRP groups showed higher bone volume fraction (BV/TV) and trabecular thickness (Tb.Th) but lower trabecular separation (Tb.Sp) and total porosity percentage (Po (tot)) at all 3 time points. A significant decrease in BV/TV and Tb.Th was found for the control groups after 3 months of healing, while this was not observed in both the PPP and PRP groups. However, no distinct difference was found between the PRP and PPP groups over time. Moreover, as the investigated distance from the implant surface increased, BV/TV and Po (tot) within the same group and time point stayed the same, yet Tb.Th and Tb.Sp continued to increase.
Platelet-rich plasma and PPP with conventional implant placement lead to similar primary and secondary implant stability, but improved peri-implant bone volume and structural integration. The present research does not seem to suggest a different bone remodeling pattern when using PRP or PPP.
使用高分辨率微计算机断层扫描（micro-CT）评估富血小板血浆（PRP）和贫血小板血浆（PPP）局部应用后 6 个月种植体周围小梁骨体积和结构的变化。
将 72 颗牙种植体植入 9 只比格犬愈合的下颌骨位点。采用裂口腔设计，将种植体随机分为 4 组：对照组 I；对照组 II；PPP 组；PRP 组。使用共振频率分析评估初始稳定性和二次稳定性。在种植体加载后 1、3 和 6 个月，使用 micro-CT（体素=20μm）在距种植体 0.5、1 和 1.5mm 处评估小梁结构参数。
所有条件下的初始稳定性和二次稳定性都相当。PPP 组和 PRP 组在所有 3 个时间点的骨体积分数（BV/TV）和骨小梁厚度（Tb.Th）更高，但骨小梁间距（Tb.Sp）和总孔隙率百分比（Po（tot））更低。对照组在愈合后 3 个月时，BV/TV 和 Tb.Th 显著下降，而 PPP 组和 PRP 组则没有观察到这种情况。然而，PRP 组和 PPP 组之间在不同时间没有明显差异。此外，随着从种植体表面测量距离的增加，同一组和时间点的 BV/TV 和 Po（tot）保持不变，但 Tb.Th 和 Tb.Sp 继续增加。
富血小板血浆和 PPP 联合常规种植体植入可获得相似的初始和二次种植体稳定性，但可改善种植体周围的骨量和结构整合。本研究似乎没有表明在使用 PRP 或 PPP 时存在不同的骨重塑模式。
