Premium
Platelet‐Rich Plasma–Assisted Guided Bone Regeneration for Ridge Augmentation: A Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial
Author(s) -
Eskan Mehmet Akif,
Greenwell Henry,
Hill Margaret,
Morton Dean,
Vidal Ricardo,
Shumway Brian,
Girouard MarieEve
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
journal of periodontology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.036
H-Index - 156
eISSN - 1943-3670
pISSN - 0022-3492
DOI - 10.1902/jop.2013.130260
Subject(s) - platelet rich plasma , trephine , dentistry , ridge , medicine , randomized controlled trial , iliac crest , urology , surgery , platelet , paleontology , biology
Background: Platelet‐rich plasma (PRP) contains a number of biologically active growth factors, and previous studies have reported conflicting ridge augmentation results. The primary aim of this randomized, controlled, masked, clinical trial was to determine if PRP combined with a rapidly resorbing cancellous allograft would enhance the regenerative result compared with an allograft without PRP. Methods: Thirty‐two patients with an edentulous ridge defect were sequentially entered into the study; four were excluded from data analysis. Fourteen patients received a cancellous allograft (CAN group) and the other 14 received a cancellous allograft mixed with PRP (PRP group). All 28 grafted sites were covered with a resorbable polylactide membrane. After elevation of a full‐thickness flap, horizontal ridge dimensions were measured with a digital caliper at the crest and 5 mm apical to the crest. Vertical ridge dimensions were measured from a tooth‐supported stent. All sites were reentered at 4 months, and a trephine core was obtained for histologic analysis before implant placement. Results: The crestal ridge width for the CAN group had a mean gain of 2.0 ± 1.2 mm, whereas the PRP group gained 2.9 ± 1.0, and the difference was statistically significant between groups ( P <0.05). The percent vital bone was 36% ± 14% for the CAN group compared with 51% ± 15% for the PRP group and was statistically significant between groups ( P <0.05). Loss of augmented ridge width was 34% ± 17% for the CAN group and 28% ± 17% for the PRP group ( P >0.05). Conclusion: These clinical and histologic findings suggest that PRP enhanced bone regeneration and resulted in increased horizontal bone gain and percentage vital bone.