Evaluation of the Effect of Platelet-Rich Fibrin on the Alveolar Osteitis Incidence and Periodontal Probing Depth after Extracting Partially Erupted Mandibular Third Molars Extraction

Nonpharmacological Complementary Interventions for the Management of Pain after Third Molar Surgery: An Umbrella Review of Current Meta-Analyses

Objectives. To provide a nonbiased, complete assessment of what the evidence from meta-analyses informs us about complementary and nonpharmacological treatment options for the management of pain after third molar surgery, as well as highlight any discordancy, gaps, or lack of evidence among meta-analyses. Methods. The quality of the included systematic reviews was assessed using the ROBIS tool. Corrected covered area (CCA) was calculated for pairs of similar meta-analyses to identify the amount of overlap. Reviews that were the most recent, comprehensive, and had adequate quality were considered for analyses when reviews showed a high overlap. In cases with a low amount of overlap among meta-analyses, all eligible studies were included. Also, citation matrices were constructed to address overlap. A network meta-analytical approach was adopted to rank different interventions. Results. Ten meta-analyses were included for quantitative synthesis. The quantitative analysis revealed that platelet-rich fibrin and its derivatives as well as ozone therapy reduce early and late pain better than the other complementary interventions compared to control (no complementary intervention). Conclusions. Despite the shortcomings of included meta-analyses, consolidated evidence suggests that platelet-rich-fibrin and its derivatives as well as ozone therapy outperform the other nonpharmacological complementary interventions in reducing early and late postsurgical pain following third molar extraction. However, the results should be interpreted with caution due to an unclear risk of bias and lack of firm evidence in the included meta-analyses. Moreover, there is a need for a standard protocol for the application of nonpharmacological complementary interventions.

The Growth Factors in Advanced Platelet-Rich Fibrin (A-PRF) Reduce Postoperative Complications after Mandibular Third Molar Odontectomy

Surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars constitutes one of the most frequently performed procedures within oral surgery. This surgery procedure is associated with many post-operative complications. Advanced platelet-rich fibrin (A-PRF) belongs to the second generation of platelet concentrates and is rich in numerous growth factors. The aim of this study was to assess the influence of A-PRF on selected clinical features following the surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars. The research was conducted on 100 generally healthy patients, who underwent a lower third molar odontectomy in Department of Oral Surgery, Medical University of Gdańsk, Poland, between 2018 and 2019. The research group consisted of 50 patients (immediate A-PRF socket filling) and control group (50 patients without A-PRF socket filling). During the study, the following clinical features were assessed: pain (visual analog scale), analgesics intake, the presence of trismus, edema, hematomas within the surrounding tissues (e.g., cheek), prevalence of pyrexia, dry socket, secondary bleeding, presence of hematomas, skin warmth in the post-operative area, and bleeding time observed by the patient were analyzed on the 3rd, 7th, and 14th day after the procedure. There was a significant association between A-PRF socket filling and pain intensity, the analgesics intake, trismus, and edema on the 3rd and the 7th day (p < 0.05). The presence of hematomas and skin warmth on the 3rd day after the surgery (p < 0.05) were also statistically associated with A-PRF use. The study showed that in reducing the incidence of postoperative complications, A-PRF was more important than the position of the tooth or the duration of the procedure. The growth factors in A-PRF reduce postoperative complications, such as pain, trismus, edema, analgesics intake, presence of hematomas, and skin warmth, after mandibular wisdom teeth odontectomy.

Application of platelet-rich fibrin on mandibular third molar extraction: systematic review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to analyze the effectiveness of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) in mandibular third molar extraction and provide suggestions for alleviating postoperative complications.

METHODS

Pubmed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and SinoMed were searched electronically on February 2020. Randomized controlled trials focusing on PRF usage in mandibular third molar extraction were included. Reviewers assessed the risk of bias in the included literature and extracted data independently using the criteria recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 and STATA 13.0.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies were included, comprising 991 patients who had mandibular third molar extraction. The topical application of PRF effectively reduced pain after extraction [MD=-12.06, 95%CI (-21.42, -2.71), P=0.01], attenuated post-extraction swelling [MD=-1.42, 95%CI (-2.41, -0.44), P=0.005], and promoted soft tissue hea-ling [MD=0.66, 95%CI (0.34, 0.99), P<0.000 1]. PRF significantly reduced trismus and alveolar osteitis (P<0.05). However, data could not prove whether PRF has any significant positive effect on bone healing compared with the control group (P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Limited clinical evidence indicates that applying PRF after mandibular third molar extraction could reduce pain, swelling, trismus and the occurrence of dry socket and promote soft tissue healing. However, the effect of PRF on bone healing requires further large-scale randomized controlled trials and unified measurement criteria.

Surgical techniques for the removal of mandibular wisdom teeth

BACKGROUND

Pathology relating to mandibular wisdom teeth is a frequent presentation to oral and maxillofacial surgeons, and surgical removal of mandibular wisdom teeth is a common operation. The indications for surgical removal of these teeth are alleviation of local pain, swelling and trismus, and also the prevention of spread of infection that may occasionally threaten life. Surgery is commonly associated with short-term postoperative pain, swelling and trismus. Less frequently, infection, dry socket (alveolar osteitis) and trigeminal nerve injuries may occur. This review focuses on the optimal methods in order to improve patient experience and minimise postoperative morbidity.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the relative benefits and risks of different techniques for surgical removal of mandibular wisdom teeth.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health Trials Register (to 8 July 2019), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library; 2019, Issue 6), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 8 July 2019), and Embase Ovid (1980 to 8 July 2019). We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. We placed no restrictions on the language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing different surgical techniques for the removal of mandibular wisdom teeth.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors were involved in assessing the relevance of identified studies, evaluated the risk of bias in included studies and extracted data. We used risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous data in parallel-group trials (or Peto odds ratios if the event rate was low), odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous data in cross-over or split-mouth studies, and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data. We took into account the pairing of the split-mouth studies in our analyses, and combined parallel-group and split-mouth studies using the generic inverse-variance method. We used the fixed-effect model for three studies or fewer, and random-effects model for more than three studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 62 trials with 4643 participants. Several of the trials excluded individuals who were not in excellent health. We assessed 33 of the studies (53%) as being at high risk of bias and 29 as unclear. We report results for our primary outcomes below. Comparisons of different suturing techniques and of drain versus no drain did not report any of our primary outcomes. No studies provided useable data for any of our primary outcomes in relation to coronectomy. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether envelope or triangular flap designs led to more alveolar osteitis (OR 0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09 to 1.23; 5 studies; low-certainty evidence), wound infection (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.06; 2 studies; low-certainty evidence), or permanent altered tongue sensation (Peto OR 4.48, 95% CI 0.07 to 286.49; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). In terms of other adverse effects, two studies reported wound dehiscence at up to 30 days after surgery, but found no difference in risk between interventions. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether the use of a lingual retractor affected the risk of permanent altered sensation compared to not using one (Peto OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.00 to 6.82; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). None of our other primary outcomes were reported by studies included in this comparison. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether lingual split with chisel is better than a surgical hand-piece for bone removal in terms of wound infection (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.31 to 3.21; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). Alveolar osteitis, permanent altered sensation, and other adverse effects were not reported. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether there is any difference in alveolar osteitis according to irrigation method (mechanical versus manual: RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.09; 1 study) or irrigation volume (high versus low; RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.02; 1 study), or whether there is any difference in postoperative infection according to irrigation method (mechanical versus manual: RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.43; 1 study) or irrigation volume (low versus high; RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.37; 1 study) (all very low-certainty evidence). These studies did not report permanent altered sensation and adverse effects. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether primary or secondary wound closure led to more alveolar osteitis (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.40; 3 studies; low-certainty evidence), wound infection (RR 4.77, 95% CI 0.24 to 96.34; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence), or adverse effects (bleeding) (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.11 to 1.47; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). These studies did not report permanent sensation changes. Placing platelet rich plasma (PRP) or platelet rich fibrin (PRF) in sockets may reduce the incidence of alveolar osteitis (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.67; 2 studies), but the evidence is of low certainty. Our other primary outcomes were not reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In this 2020 update, we added 27 new studies to the original 35 in the 2014 review. Unfortunately, even with the addition of these studies, we have been unable to draw many meaningful conclusions. The small number of trials evaluating each comparison and reporting our primary outcomes, along with methodological biases in the included trials, means that the body of evidence for each of the nine comparisons evaluated is of low or very low certainty. Participant populations in the trials may not be representative of the general population, or even the population undergoing third molar surgery. Many trials excluded individuals who were not in good health, and several excluded those with active infection or who had deep impactions of their third molars. Consequently, we are unable to make firm recommendations to surgeons to inform their techniques for removal of mandibular third molars. The evidence is uncertain, though we note that there is some limited evidence that placing PRP or PRF in sockets may reduce the incidence of dry socket. The evidence provided in this review may be used as a guide for surgeons when selecting and refining their surgical techniques. Ongoing studies may allow us to provide more definitive conclusions in the future.

Comparative Analysis of Blood Clot, Plasma Rich in Growth Factors and Platelet-Rich Fibrin Resistance to Bacteria-Induced Fibrinolysis

Alveolar osteitis (AO) is a common, painful postoperative complication after tooth extraction. Fibrinolytic activity in the extraction socket is one etiological factor. Platelet concentrates are used to prevent and treat AO. The aim of this study was to find out whether the positive effect of platelet concentrates can be related to resistance to bacteria-induced fibrinolysis. Blood from 45 human volunteers was used to prepare four media: blood clot medium as control group; PRF and PRGF first fraction (PRGF I) and PRGF second fraction (PRGF II) as study groups. Additionally, collected blood was used for blood plasma preparation on which evaluation of initial value of d-dimer concentration was performed. A solution of five different microbes (Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus pyogenes, Streptococcus pneumonia, Bacillus cereus, and Candida albicans) was adjusted to 0.5 McFarland (1 × 10⁸ CFU/mL) and then diluted to 0.25 McFarland (0.5 × 10⁸ CFU/mL). The d-dimer concentration was evaluated after one and three hours of bacteria exposure. The resistance to fibrinolysis was not statistically distinguished among any media groups at any time. S. pneumoniae was statistically active in PRF after three hours. C. albicans was statistically active in PRGF II after one hour and in PRF between the first and third hour and after three hours. S. aureus and B. cereus were statistically active in PRGF II after three hours. S. pyogenes was statistically active after one hour, between the first and third hour, and after the third hour in all groups. S. pyogenes was the most active bacterium. Different blood formulations were not distinguishable based on resistance to bacteria-induced fibrinolysis. Low fibrinolytic properties of the found major microbes suggests that bacteria-induced fibrinolysis is one of the leading causes of absence of a clot in a post-extraction socket to be clinically insignificant. The initial absence of a clot or its mechanical elimination during formation or the healing period are major causes of dry socket.

Regenerative Effect of Platelet Concentrates in Oral and Craniofacial Regeneration

Platelet concentrates (PCs) are biological autologous products derived from the patient's whole blood and consist mainly of supraphysiologic concentration of platelets and growth factors (GFs). These GFs have anti-inflammatory and healing enhancing properties. Overall, PCs seem to enhance bone and soft tissue healing in alveolar ridge augmentation, periodontal surgery, socket preservation, implant surgery, endodontic regeneration, sinus augmentation, bisphosphonate related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ), osteoradionecrosis, closure of oroantral communication (OAC), and oral ulcers. On the other hand, no effect was reported for gingival recession and guided tissue regeneration (GTR) procedures. Also, PCs could reduce pain and inflammatory complications in temporomandibular disorders (TMDs), oral ulcers, and extraction sockets. However, these effects have been clinically inconsistent across the literature. Differences in study designs and types of PCs used with variable concentration of platelets, GFs, and leucocytes, as well as different application forms and techniques could explain these contradictory results. This study aims to review the clinical applications of PCs in oral and craniofacial tissue regeneration and the role of their molecular components in tissue healing.