Premium
Comparative Analysis of Local Application of Titanium‐Platelet Rich Fibrin (T‐PRF) and Leukocyte‐Platelet Rich Fibrin (L‐PRF) in Bone Defect Healing: A Micro‐CT and Histopathological Study in Rabbit Models
Author(s) -
Yaşar Nilay Çalikoğlu,
Ünsal Gürkan,
Kocaelli Hümeyra Arikan,
Orhan Kaan,
Sağ Fatma Beyza
Publication year - 2025
Publication title -
microscopy research and technique
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.536
H-Index - 118
eISSN - 1097-0029
pISSN - 1059-910X
DOI - 10.1002/jemt.24841
Subject(s) - platelet rich fibrin , fibrin , bone healing , medicine , x ray microtomography , biomedical engineering , nuclear medicine , dentistry , materials science , pathology , anatomy , radiology , immunology
ABSTRACT This study aims to compare the efficacy of locally applied Titanium‐Platelet Rich Fibrin (T‐PRF) and Leukocyte‐Platelet Rich Fibrin (L‐PRF) in bone defect healing using micro‐CT analysis and histopathological examinations in rabbit models. Eight healthy male New Zealand rabbits, aged 4–6 months, were utilized. Circular bicortical defects (6 mm diameter) were created at three areas in each rabbit. One of the defects was chosen as the control group, which received saline solution, while T‐PRF and L‐PRF were applied to the defect sites in separate experimental groups. Bone regeneration was analyzed using high‐resolution micro‐CT and histological evaluation post‐sacrifice. Statistical analysis assessed the significance of observed differences. Micro‐CT analysis revealed significant differences among the groups in bone volume, trabecular thickness, trabecular number, connectivity, and connectivity density ( p < 0.05). Both T‐PRF and L‐PRF groups exhibited superior bone parameters compared to controls, with L‐PRF showing higher values. Trabecular separation and bone surface area to bone volume ratio did not differ significantly among the groups ( p > 0.05). Histological examination indicated advanced healing stages in the L‐PRF group, suggesting both T‐PRF and L‐PRF contribute to bone regeneration, with L‐PRF demonstrating better effects. The study concludes that while both T‐PRF and L‐PRF aid in bone regeneration, L‐PRF shows superior efficacy. L‐PRF is recommended for bone defect healing due to its better performance in enhancing bone parameters.