Application of Platelet-Rich Fibrin Derivatives for Mandibular Third Molar Extraction Related Post-Operative Sequelae: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis
Department of Head and Neck Oncology, West China Hospital of Stomatology, State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China. Resident, Department of Head and Neck Oncology, West China Hospital of Stomatology, State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China. Professor, Department of Head and Neck Oncology, West China Hospital of Stomatology, State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China. Electronic address: lichunjie@scu.edu.cn.
Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. 2021
PURPOSE Leukocyte- and platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) and advanced-platelet-rich fibrin (A-PRF) that are derivatives of PRF (platelet-rich fibrin) accelerate wound healing and reduce postoperative sequelae after tooth extraction. This network meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effectiveness of L-PRF and A-PRF in mandibular third molar extraction and provide suggestions for alleviating postoperative symptoms and signs. METHODS A comprehensive search of the literature
was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and SinoMed databases up to Oct 9, 2020. Three types of randomized controlled trials were included to investigate the effects of PRF derivatives after extracting mandibular third molars: A-PRF and L-PRF groups; A-PRF and control groups; L-PRF and control groups. Their relative effectiveness and ranking were assessed using network meta-analysis and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) with STATA 16.0 and Revman 5.3, respectively. RESULTS Ten randomized controlled trials were included, with 307 mandibular third molar extraction patients involved. The results showed that A-PRF had the best effect among the 3 groups in improving postoperative pain on the third (SUCRA = 98.2%) and seventh (SUCRA = 88.4%) days; L-PRF promoted soft tissue healing (MD=-0.90, 95% CI [-1.40, -0.40], P = .0004) on the seventh day compared with the control. However, other comparisons showed no significant differences (P > .05). CONCLUSION The limited results confirmed that PRF derivatives only reduced some postoperative symptoms and did not prevent them all. Application of A-PRF after third molar extraction reduced postoperative pain, and L-PRF improved the degree of soft tissue healing.
