Journal
BMC ORAL HEALTH
Volume 16, Issue -, Pages -Publisher
BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-016-0261-5
Keywords
Periodontal disease; Platelet rich plasma; Randomized controlled trial; Meta analysis
Categories
Funding
- Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region major research and development project [2016B03049-1]
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Background: Studies investigating the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the treatment of intrabony defects have yielded mixed results. The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of PRP by comparing clinical attachment level (CAL) and pocket depth (PD) for patients who received PRP as an adjunct to periodontal intrabony defect therapy with those for patients who did not. We also analyzed the influence of guided tissue regeneration (GTR) and different study designs (parallel and split-mouth studies) on the clinical outcomes of intrabony defects. Methods: We performed a systematic review of articles published in any language up to June 7, 2015 by searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We included only randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) that compared clinical outcomes between patients who received PRP as an adjunct to periodontal intrabony defect therapy and patients who did not. We combined data from randomized trials to assess clinical outcomes using a random-effects model. Results: Of the 307 abstracts that were initially identified, 12 RCTs related to the treatment of periodontal intrabony defects were included in the final analysis. Clinically and significantly greater CAL gains and PD reductions were observed in subjects who received PRP as an adjunct to periodontal intrabony defect therapy than in subjects who did not (CAL: WMD 0.76 mm, 95 % CI = 0.34 to 1.18 mm, P = 0.0004; PD: WMD 0.53 mm, 95 % CI = 0.21 to 0.85 mm, P = 0.001). Subgroup meta-analyses of patients who underwent GTR demonstrated that this approach did not significantly affect treatment outcomes (CAL: WMD 0.08 mm, 95 % CI = -0.30 to 0.46 mm, P = 0.67), as indicated by a comparison with patients who did not undergo GTR (CAL: WMD 1. 22 mm, 95 % CI = 0.88 to 1.57 mm, P < 0.00001). Univariate meta-regression analyses revealed that the use of GTR explained the heterogeneity among the included studies (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Within its limitations, this review suggests that PRP may be beneficial as an adjunct to graft materials for the treatment of periodontal intrabony defects, except in cases involving the use of GTR.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available