{"title":"自体血小板聚集物与血凝块对再生牙髓治疗结果的比较评价:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Saumya Verma, Alpa Gupta, Mrinalini Mrinalini, Dax Abraham, Unnati Soma","doi":"10.4317/jced.62508","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Regenerative endodontics represents a transformative approach to dental care, revitalizing necrotic teeth. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the role of autologous platelet aggregates compared to the traditional blood clot method in regenerative endodontics.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, EBSCO, Open Grey, and Google Scholar between 1st-12th August 2024. Case series, RCTs, retrospective studies, and case reports were included. Meta-analysis on RCTs and case series utilized RevMan 5.4 software, with <i>p</i>=0.05 as the significance level. The JBI risk of bias tool and GRADE system assessed study quality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nineteen studies met inclusion criteria, of which 13 were evaluated for risk of bias-11 showed low risk, and 2 were moderate. Rates of complete apical closure using PRF, BC, PRP, and CGF scaffolds ranged from 61.76% to 100%. Statistical analysis revealed no significant differences between autologous platelet aggregates and BC for outcomes such as complete apical closure (BC vs. PRP: <i>p</i>=0.28; BC vs. PRF: <i>p</i>=0.36), positive vitality (BC vs. PRP: <i>p</i>=0.70; BC vs. PRF: <i>p</i>=0.36), healing response (BC vs. PRF: <i>p</i>=0.23), and overall success score (BC vs. PRP: <i>p</i>=0.62).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>BC remains an effective primary scaffold for non-vital teeth with open apexes. PRP and PRF are viable alternatives when intracanal blood induction is challenging. Overall, platelet aggregates and BC showed comparable clinical and radiographic outcomes. <b>Key words:</b>Apexogenesis, Autologous Platelet Aggregates, Blood Clot, Immature Tooth, Regenerative Endodontics.</p>","PeriodicalId":15376,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry","volume":"17 4","pages":"e447-e460"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12077828/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Evaluation of Autologous Platelet Aggregates Versus Blood Clot On The Outcome Of Regenerative Endodontic Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Saumya Verma, Alpa Gupta, Mrinalini Mrinalini, Dax Abraham, Unnati Soma\",\"doi\":\"10.4317/jced.62508\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Regenerative endodontics represents a transformative approach to dental care, revitalizing necrotic teeth. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the role of autologous platelet aggregates compared to the traditional blood clot method in regenerative endodontics.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, EBSCO, Open Grey, and Google Scholar between 1st-12th August 2024. Case series, RCTs, retrospective studies, and case reports were included. Meta-analysis on RCTs and case series utilized RevMan 5.4 software, with <i>p</i>=0.05 as the significance level. The JBI risk of bias tool and GRADE system assessed study quality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nineteen studies met inclusion criteria, of which 13 were evaluated for risk of bias-11 showed low risk, and 2 were moderate. Rates of complete apical closure using PRF, BC, PRP, and CGF scaffolds ranged from 61.76% to 100%. Statistical analysis revealed no significant differences between autologous platelet aggregates and BC for outcomes such as complete apical closure (BC vs. PRP: <i>p</i>=0.28; BC vs. PRF: <i>p</i>=0.36), positive vitality (BC vs. PRP: <i>p</i>=0.70; BC vs. PRF: <i>p</i>=0.36), healing response (BC vs. PRF: <i>p</i>=0.23), and overall success score (BC vs. PRP: <i>p</i>=0.62).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>BC remains an effective primary scaffold for non-vital teeth with open apexes. PRP and PRF are viable alternatives when intracanal blood induction is challenging. Overall, platelet aggregates and BC showed comparable clinical and radiographic outcomes. <b>Key words:</b>Apexogenesis, Autologous Platelet Aggregates, Blood Clot, Immature Tooth, Regenerative Endodontics.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15376,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry\",\"volume\":\"17 4\",\"pages\":\"e447-e460\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12077828/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.62508\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Dentistry\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.62508","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:再生牙髓学代表了一种变革性的牙齿护理方法,使坏死的牙齿恢复活力。本系统综述和荟萃分析评估了自体血小板聚集体与传统血凝块方法在再生牙髓学中的作用。材料与方法:系统检索PubMed、Scopus、EBSCO、Open Grey和谷歌Scholar,检索时间为2024年8月1 -12日。包括病例系列、随机对照试验、回顾性研究和病例报告。采用RevMan 5.4软件对rct和病例序列进行meta分析,p=0.05为显著性水平。JBI偏倚风险工具和GRADE系统评估研究质量。结果:19项研究符合纳入标准,其中13项被评价为偏倚风险,11项为低风险,2项为中度风险。PRF、BC、PRP和CGF支架的根尖完全闭合率从61.76%到100%不等。统计分析显示,自体血小板聚集体和BC在完全根尖闭合等结果上无显著差异(BC vs. PRP: p=0.28;BC vs. PRF: p=0.36),阳性活力(BC vs. PRP: p=0.70;BC vs PRF: p=0.36),愈合反应(BC vs PRF: p=0.23)和总成功评分(BC vs PRP: p=0.62)。结论:BC仍然是一个有效的初级支架非生命牙开放尖。当管内血液诱导困难时,PRP和PRF是可行的选择。总的来说,血小板聚集和BC显示出相当的临床和放射学结果。关键词:拔牙,自体血小板聚集体,血凝块,未成熟牙,再生牙髓学
Comparative Evaluation of Autologous Platelet Aggregates Versus Blood Clot On The Outcome Of Regenerative Endodontic Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Background: Regenerative endodontics represents a transformative approach to dental care, revitalizing necrotic teeth. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the role of autologous platelet aggregates compared to the traditional blood clot method in regenerative endodontics.
Material and methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, EBSCO, Open Grey, and Google Scholar between 1st-12th August 2024. Case series, RCTs, retrospective studies, and case reports were included. Meta-analysis on RCTs and case series utilized RevMan 5.4 software, with p=0.05 as the significance level. The JBI risk of bias tool and GRADE system assessed study quality.
Results: Nineteen studies met inclusion criteria, of which 13 were evaluated for risk of bias-11 showed low risk, and 2 were moderate. Rates of complete apical closure using PRF, BC, PRP, and CGF scaffolds ranged from 61.76% to 100%. Statistical analysis revealed no significant differences between autologous platelet aggregates and BC for outcomes such as complete apical closure (BC vs. PRP: p=0.28; BC vs. PRF: p=0.36), positive vitality (BC vs. PRP: p=0.70; BC vs. PRF: p=0.36), healing response (BC vs. PRF: p=0.23), and overall success score (BC vs. PRP: p=0.62).
Conclusions: BC remains an effective primary scaffold for non-vital teeth with open apexes. PRP and PRF are viable alternatives when intracanal blood induction is challenging. Overall, platelet aggregates and BC showed comparable clinical and radiographic outcomes. Key words:Apexogenesis, Autologous Platelet Aggregates, Blood Clot, Immature Tooth, Regenerative Endodontics.
期刊介绍:
Indexed in PUBMED, PubMed Central® (PMC) since 2012 and SCOPUSJournal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry is an Open Access (free access on-line) - http://www.medicinaoral.com/odo/indice.htm. The aim of the Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry is: - Periodontology - Community and Preventive Dentistry - Esthetic Dentistry - Biomaterials and Bioengineering in Dentistry - Operative Dentistry and Endodontics - Prosthetic Dentistry - Orthodontics - Oral Medicine and Pathology - Odontostomatology for the disabled or special patients - Oral Surgery