Evaluation of Primary and Secondary Stability of Endosseous Dental Implants With and Without the Use of Platelet-Rich Fibrin: A Clinical Study

TL;DR

This clinical study examines how using platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) affects the stability of dental implants, finding improved outcomes in patients who received PRF.

Contribution

The study introduces PRF as a potential method to enhance both primary and secondary dental implant stability.

Findings

PRF group showed higher implant stability in the third and sixth months.

PRF group had lower implant probing pocket depth in the sixth month.

Abstract

Background: This clinical study investigates platelet-rich fibrin's (PRF) impact on dental implant stability, addressing global oral health challenges and limitations of traditional methods. Emphasizing osseointegration's pivotal role, the study explores PRF's potential in enhancing implant stability, assessing it through resonance frequency analysis (RFA) and implant stability quotient (ISQ). The hypothesis suggests PRF may improve both primary and secondary stability, aiming to uncover clinical benefits in dental implant procedures

Materials and methods: The study involved 24 subjects from the Department of Periodontics outpatient clinics with a meticulously designed methodology. This included a pre-surgical protocol with oral prophylaxis, impressions, and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) analysis. PRF preparation utilized a minimally invasive venipuncture technique. Implant placement followed a two-stage surgical protocol, assessing primary stability with MEGA ISQ (Ostell). Post-surgery, patients received instructions and underwent recall for secondary stability after three months. Clinical parameters such as plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), implant probing pocket depth (IPPD), sulcus bleeding index (SBI), and implant stability (IS) were systematically recorded. Robust statistical analyses, using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows v20.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, USA) software, incorporated Mann-Whitney U and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests for group and within-time point comparisons, with a significance level of p<0.05. This comprehensive study yields nuanced insights into the impact of PRF and implant procedures on key clinical parameters, contributing significantly to the field.

Results: This study compared dental implants with and without PRF in 24 patients. Both groups showed significant improvements in the PI, GI, and SBI. The PRF group exhibited higher IS in the third and sixth months, while IPPD was lower in the PRF group in the sixth month.

Conclusion: The findings of the study highlight a positive impact on implant stability contributing to better implant outcomes.

Figures