Comparing the effect of Leukocyte PRF (L-PRF) and Advanced PRF(A-PRF) added to nanohydroxyapatite on osseous regeneration after maxillary cyst enucleation (Randomized controlled trial)

Elsakka, Areeg Ahmed; Taha, Moustafa; Nabil, Yasser; Diaa, Mohamed

doi:10.21608/OMX.2024.278499.1233

Comparing the effect of Leukocyte PRF (L-PRF) and Advanced PRF(A-PRF) added to nanohydroxyapatite on osseous regeneration after maxillary cyst enucleation (Randomized controlled trial)

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

¹ Oral and maxillofacial department,faculty of dentistry,ains hams university,cairo,egypt

² Department of oral and maxillofacial surgery, Faculty of dentistry, Ain shams university, Cairo, Egypt

³ Oral Maxillofacial Surgery, Specialized Dental Military Teaching hospital, Kobry Elkobba complex, Cairo, Egypt

⁴ Oral and Maxillofacial department, faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt

10.21608/OMX.2024.278499.1233

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the difference between the effect of Leukocyte PRF (L-PRF) and Advanced PRF(A-PRF) added to nano hydroxyapatite bone graft on osseous regeneration after cyst enucleation.

Methodology: This clinical study was a Randomized Controlled Trial on 21 patients seeking treatment of maxillary cyst and randomly allocated into 3 groups each group containing 7 patients. In group A, a blood sample was collected for preparation of A-PRF and added to nano hydroxyapatite bone graft to fill the bony defect after cyst enucleation. In group B, L-PRF was prepared and added to nanobone to fill the defect. While group C was a negative control group with no grafting of residual defect.

Results: Regarding CT preoperative and postoperative volumetric measurements of the defect, there was a significant difference between different groups (p=0.002). Defect volume was reduced by 80.72% in group A followed by group B which reduced by 62.36% then group C reduced by 21.49 %.Also, there was increase in bone density by 78.56% in group A followed by group B increased by 53.70% while in group C increased by 21.49%.And also, there was 78.64% reduction in size of the residual defect in group A followed by group B reduced by 66.20% and the least group was group C reduced by 48.60%.

Conclusion: A-PRF/nanobone mixture accelerated bone healing and improved both quality and quantity of regenerated bone in residual defects compared to L-PRF/ Nanobone mixture and control groups. And outcomes of L-PRF/ Nanobone mixture were better than control group.

Keywords