Home | About us | Editorial board | Ahead of print | Current issue | Archives | Search | Submit article | Instructions | Subscribe | Advertise | Contact us |  Login 
National Journal of Maxillofacial Surgery
 
Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Users Online: 67
 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 7  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 45-51

A randomized comparative prospective study of platelet-rich plasma, platelet-rich fibrin, and hydroxyapatite as a graft material for mandibular third molar extraction socket healing


1 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, M.B. Kedia Dental College, Birgunj, Nepal
2 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, ESIC Dental College and Hospital, New Delhi, India
3 Department of Physiology, M.B. Kedia Dental College, Birgunj, Nepal
4 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, ESIC Dental College and Hospital, New Delhi, India
5 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Uttaranchal Dental and Medical Research Institute, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India

Correspondence Address:
Mahinder Singh
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Uttaranchal Dental and Medical Research Institute, Mazri Grant, Dehradun, Uttarakhand
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0975-5950.196124

Rights and Permissions

Aim: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP), platelet-rich fibrin (PRF), and hydroxyapatite (HA) for reduction of pain and swelling, absence of dry socket, soft tissue healing, and bone regeneration after mandibular third molar extraction in human patients. Materials and Methods: Forty patients requiring extraction of mandibular third molars were randomly grouped as control, PRP, PRF, and HA-treated. The patients were assessed for postoperative pain, swelling, dry socket, and soft tissue healing on the 3rd, 7th, and 14th day of postoperative periods depending on the standard methods. Radiological assessment of the extraction site was done at 1, 2, and 6 months interval to compare the change in bone density in the sockets in control and treated patients. Results: Pain and swelling were less on PRP and PRF site when compared to HA and control site. PRP and PRF site showed better soft tissue healing when compared to HA and control site. Radiographic assessment showed comparatively lesser bone density values in PRP, PRF, and control site at 1, 2, and 6 months than HA site. Conclusion: Our study showed that PRP and PRF are better graft materials than HA regarding pain, swelling, dry socket, and soft tissue healing. Bone regeneration is induced promptly by HA as compared to other graft materials. However, a more elaborate study with a larger number of clinical cases is very much essential to be more conclusive regarding the efficacy of the graft materials.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed84    
    Printed0    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded53    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal