Gummaluri Shiva Shankar, Bhattacharya Hirak S, Astekar Madhusudan, Cheruvu Shivani
Department of Periodontology and Implantology, Institute of Dental Sciences, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Institute of Dental Sciences, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, India.
J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2020 Spring;14(2):83-91. doi: 10.34172/joddd.2020.020. Epub 2020 Jun 17.
Various treatment modalities, such as leucocyte platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF), bone grafts, and membranes, have been used for the restoration of lost periodontal tissues. Titanium-prepared platelet-rich fibrin (T-PRF) has attracted attention for its proper haemocompatibility, thick fibrin meshwork, and long resorption time. The present study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of T-PRF and L-PRF in the management of intra-bony defects based on clinical and radiographic criteria. Twenty-six subjects with 34 intra-bony 3- walled defects were divided into two groups (n=17) and treated with T-PRF or L-PRF. Clinical and radiographic measurements were recorded at baseline and 6- , 3- and 9- month intervals and tabulated on Microsoft Excel spreadsheets. For intra- and intergroup comparisons, paired and unpaired t-tests were performed. P<0.05 was set as statistically significant Intra-group comparisons revealed statistically significant differences (P<0.05) from baseline in both groups regarding clinical measurements. On intergroup comparison, the T-PRF group exhibited a significantly higher defect fill compared to the L-PRF group (P<0.05). Within the limits of the present study, T-PRF seems to be a better alternative to L-PRF in the treatment of intra-bony defects.
多种治疗方式,如富含白细胞的血小板纤维蛋白(L-PRF)、骨移植和膜,已被用于修复缺失的牙周组织。钛制备的富含血小板纤维蛋白(T-PRF)因其良好的血液相容性、厚厚的纤维蛋白网络和较长的吸收时间而受到关注。本研究旨在根据临床和影像学标准评估T-PRF和L-PRF在治疗骨内缺损中的有效性。26名患有34个骨内三壁缺损的受试者被分为两组(n = 17),分别接受T-PRF或L-PRF治疗。在基线以及6个月、3个月和9个月时记录临床和影像学测量数据,并整理到Microsoft Excel电子表格中。对于组内和组间比较,进行配对和非配对t检验。设定P<0.05为具有统计学意义。组内比较显示,两组在临床测量方面与基线相比均有统计学意义上的显著差异(P<0.05)。组间比较时,T-PRF组的缺损填充明显高于L-PRF组(P<0.05)。在本研究的范围内,T-PRF似乎是治疗骨内缺损时比L-PRF更好的选择。