> Detailanzeige

Stähli, Alexandra; Strauss, Franz Josef; Gruber, Reinhard

The use of platelet‐rich plasma to enhance the outcomes of implant therapy: A systematic review

Literatur-
verwaltung

Zur
Merkliste

Lösche von
Merkliste

Per Whatsapp teilen

Schließen

Merkliste



Sie können Bookmarks mittels Listen verwalten, loggen Sie sich dafür bitte in Ihr SLUB Benutzerkonto ein.
  • Medientyp: E-Artikel
  • Titel: The use of platelet‐rich plasma to enhance the outcomes of implant therapy: A systematic review
  • Beteiligte: Stähli, Alexandra; Strauss, Franz Josef; Gruber, Reinhard
  • Erschienen: Wiley, 2018
  • Erschienen in: Clinical Oral Implants Research
  • Sprache: Englisch
  • DOI: 10.1111/clr.13296
  • ISSN: 0905-7161; 1600-0501
  • Entstehung:
  • Anmerkungen:
  • Beschreibung: <jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>Objective</jats:title><jats:p>To assess the effect of platelet‐rich plasma (<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">PRP</jats:styled-content>) on implant dentistry. The primary focused question was as follows: What are the clinical, histological, and radiographic outcomes of <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">PRP</jats:styled-content> administration for bone regeneration and implant therapy?</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Methods</jats:title><jats:p>A literature search was conducted involving three databases: <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">MEDLINE</jats:styled-content>,<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case"> EMBASE</jats:styled-content> and Cochrane database followed by a hand search of relevant scientific journals. Human studies using <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">PRP</jats:styled-content> for bone regeneration and implant therapy were considered and articles published up to December 31, 2017 were included. Eligible studies were selected based on the inclusion criteria, and quality assessments were conducted.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results</jats:title><jats:p>In total, out from the 9,497 titles meeting the original search criteria, 22 fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were chosen for data extraction. Among them were 15 randomized controlled trials (<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">RCT</jats:styled-content>) and seven controlled clinical trials (<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">CCT</jats:styled-content>). Overall, the risk of bias was moderate to high. A total of seven studies showed superior outcomes when <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">PRP</jats:styled-content> was added during sinus floor elevation and five showed no superior outcome. Three studies found a significant advantage of <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">PRP</jats:styled-content> for alveolar bone regeneration and another three studies for soft tissue healing. Three studies reported on beneficial effects of <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">PRP</jats:styled-content> directly during implant placement while another study failed to find significant differences. Due to the heterogeneity of study designs, no meta‐analysis could be performed.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Summary and Conclusions</jats:title><jats:p>Despite the lack of consistent evidence supporting the clinical benefit of <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">PRP</jats:styled-content> in healthy patients, <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">PRP</jats:styled-content> might have a positive effect on wound healing and bone regeneration in compromised patients.</jats:p></jats:sec>