Cargando…

The efficacy of concentrated growth factor and platelet-rich fibrin as scaffolds in regenerative endodontic treatment applied to immature permanent teeth: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the efficacy of concentrated growth factor (CGF) and platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) as scaffolds in regenerative endodontic therapy (RET). METHODS: Necrotic immature permanent teeth treated with regenerative endodontic therapy during January...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Jiahua, Zheng, Leilei, Daraqel, Baraa, Liu, Jing, Hu, Yun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10347868/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37452298
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-03164-y
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the efficacy of concentrated growth factor (CGF) and platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) as scaffolds in regenerative endodontic therapy (RET). METHODS: Necrotic immature permanent teeth treated with regenerative endodontic therapy during January 2018 to August 2022 were divided into the CGF and PRF groups according to the scaffold. The CGF and PRF groups included 7 and 6 teeth, respectively. The efficacy of regenerative endodontic therapy was analyzed based on the clinical and radiological outcomes at three different follow up periods: T1 (3–6 months), T2 (6–12 months) and T3 (12–24 months). Statistical analysis was performed using the independent T test, Mann-Whitney test and Fisher’s exact test at a significance level of 0.05. RESULTS: The success rate of each stage in both groups was 100%. Through quantitative comparison of radiographic outcomes, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of root development and periapical lesion healing at each stage, except that the increase rate of radiographic root area in PRF group in the T3 stage was above one in CGF group with statistically significance. CONCLUSIONS: Both CGF and PRF had a similar clinical performance regarding resolution of clinical signs and symptoms, periapical lesion healing, and continued root development as scaffolds in RET. Further prospective studies with large samples for longer follow-up periods are needed.