Evaluation of platelet concentrates in regenerative endodontics: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.9
Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics Pub Date : 2025-11-01 Epub Date: 2025-11-28 DOI:10.5395/rde.2025.50.e38
Anna Tsiolaki, Dimitrios Theocharis, Nikolaos Tsitsipas, Anastasia Fardi, Konstantinos Kodonas
{"title":"Evaluation of platelet concentrates in regenerative endodontics: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Anna Tsiolaki, Dimitrios Theocharis, Nikolaos Tsitsipas, Anastasia Fardi, Konstantinos Kodonas","doi":"10.5395/rde.2025.50.e38","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this systematic review is to compare the effectiveness of advanced platelet concentrates as regenerative endodontic therapeutic alternatives to blood clot (BC) revascularization in immature permanent necrotic teeth.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing regenerative endodontic therapies using platelet-rich plasma (PRP), platelet-rich fibrin (PRF), or platelet pellet (PP) with the BC revascularization approach in immature permanent necrotic teeth were systematically searched in PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science until May 2025. Data was extracted and analyzed both qualitatively and quantitatively. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. A meta-analysis was conducted using IBM SPSS software (version 29.0), with success rates expressed as risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The initial search yielded 4,917 studies. After removing duplicates and applying eligibility criteria, 15 RCTs were included. Meta-analysis indicated no significant difference in the risk ratio (RR), as the BC method has similar success rates with PRP (10 studies; RR = 1.01; 95% CI, 0.94-1.09; p = 0.76) and PRF (8 studies; RR = 0.98; 95% CI, 0.89-1.08; p = 0.65) at 12 months. The primary outcomes evaluated were based on clinical and radiographic success.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Current evidence suggests PRP, PRF, and BC are all effective in treating immature permanent necrotic teeth with similar success rates. However, further research is needed to assess long-term outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":21102,"journal":{"name":"Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics","volume":"50 4","pages":"e38"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12707569/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2025.50.e38","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/11/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this systematic review is to compare the effectiveness of advanced platelet concentrates as regenerative endodontic therapeutic alternatives to blood clot (BC) revascularization in immature permanent necrotic teeth.

Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing regenerative endodontic therapies using platelet-rich plasma (PRP), platelet-rich fibrin (PRF), or platelet pellet (PP) with the BC revascularization approach in immature permanent necrotic teeth were systematically searched in PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science until May 2025. Data was extracted and analyzed both qualitatively and quantitatively. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. A meta-analysis was conducted using IBM SPSS software (version 29.0), with success rates expressed as risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results: The initial search yielded 4,917 studies. After removing duplicates and applying eligibility criteria, 15 RCTs were included. Meta-analysis indicated no significant difference in the risk ratio (RR), as the BC method has similar success rates with PRP (10 studies; RR = 1.01; 95% CI, 0.94-1.09; p = 0.76) and PRF (8 studies; RR = 0.98; 95% CI, 0.89-1.08; p = 0.65) at 12 months. The primary outcomes evaluated were based on clinical and radiographic success.

Conclusions: Current evidence suggests PRP, PRF, and BC are all effective in treating immature permanent necrotic teeth with similar success rates. However, further research is needed to assess long-term outcomes.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

血小板浓缩物在再生牙髓学中的评价:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
目的:本系统综述的目的是比较先进的血小板浓缩物作为再生根管治疗替代血凝块(BC)重建术治疗未成熟永久性坏死牙齿的有效性。方法:到2025年5月,系统检索PubMed、Scopus、Cochrane Library和Web of Science,比较使用富血小板血浆(PRP)、富血小板纤维蛋白(PRF)或血小板颗粒(PP)再生牙髓治疗未成熟永久性坏死牙齿的方法与BC血管重建方法的随机对照试验(rct)。提取数据并进行定性和定量分析。使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具评估研究质量。采用IBM SPSS软件(version 29.0)进行meta分析,成功率以风险比和95%置信区间(ci)表示。结果:最初的搜索产生了4917项研究。在去除重复项并应用资格标准后,纳入了15项随机对照试验。meta分析显示,在12个月时,BC方法与PRP(10项研究,RR = 1.01; 95% CI, 0.94-1.09; p = 0.76)和PRF(8项研究,RR = 0.98; 95% CI, 0.89-1.08; p = 0.65)的成功率相似,因此风险比(RR)无显著差异。评估的主要结果是基于临床和放射学的成功。结论:目前的证据表明,PRP、PRF和BC治疗未成熟永久性坏死牙均有效,成功率相似。然而,需要进一步的研究来评估长期结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书