Table 2.

Comparison between the 3 APC techniques (PRP, PRF, and CGF) in sinus augmentation.

Year	First Author	Objectives	Methods	Results (mm)	Authors’ Conclusions
PRP
2014	Kundu et al. [42]	Evaluation of the effects of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and different implant surface topography on implant stability and bone levels around immediately loaded dental implants.	A total of 30 implants divided into Group 1 (without PRP) and Group 2 (where implants were placed after dipping in activated PRP). Implant stability was measured with Periotest.	A statistically significant difference was noted in implant stability with PRP at baseline.	PRP-treated implant surfaces resulted in improved implant stability and bone levels.
PRF
2012	Zhang et al. [48]	Influence of PRF on bone regeneration in sinus augmentation combined with DBBM.	Eleven sinuses were divided into a test group (DBBM + PRF) and control group (DBBM as the sole grafting material).	After six months, similar composition and distribution were found in both of the groups.	No significant difference between the groups was found.
2011	Somonpieri [49]	Clinical and radiological evaluation of the application of L-PRF as a sole grafting material in lateral sinus elevation procedures with simultaneous implant placement.	Twenty-three lateral sinus elevations were performed on 20 patients with simultaneous implant placement.	Six months after surgery, all implants were clinically stable during abutment tightening. Maximum follow-up at six years. Vertical bone gain between 8.5 and 12 mm.	L-PRF as the sole filling material during simultaneous sinus lift and implantation seems to be a reliable surgical option, promoting natural bone regeneration.
2018	Aoki et al. [50]	Evaluation of the application of PRF as a sole grafting material in sinus lift procedures.	A total of 71 implants in 34 patients after 1–7 years’ follow-up time. Statistical models for implant survival and potential factors associated with implant loss.	Seven implants were lost, and the cumulative survival rate at seven years by implant-based and patient-based analyses was 85.5% and 85.7%, respectively. Mean residual bone height (RBH) 4.26 mm. Greater implant survival rate for RBH < 4 mm than RBH ≥ 4 mm.	Sinus floor elevation with PRF alone could be applied in cases of lower RBH. However, it should be performed carefully in cases of RBH < 4 mm.
2018	Olgun et al. [51]	Clinical, histological, and radiographic comparison between autologous titanium-prepared PRF (T-PRF) and allografts in sinus lifting procedures.	Ten sinuses were randomly assigned to T-PRF as the test group, and 8 were assigned to allografts as the control group.	The control group showed better radiological results (62% in volume, 53% in density, and 69% in height) than the T-PRF group. Newly formed bone ratios were 17.28 ± 2.53 and 16.58 ± 1.05 in the allograft and T-PRF groups, respectively. There was no difference between the test and control groups (p = 0.611) in terms of implant stability values.	T-PRF alone in sinus lifting procedures revealed successful clinical and histomorphometric results.
2012	Tatullo et al. [52]	Clinical and histological evaluation of PRF in combination with deproteinised bovine bone (Bio-Oss) compared to DBBM alone in sinus elevation procedures.	Seventy-two sinus lifts with subsequent implant insertions.	Histological results after 106 days revealed that adding of PRF resulted in the formation of lamellar bone tissue with an interposed, richly vascularised stroma.	PRF and piezosurgery reduced the healing time compared to the 150 days described in the literature, facilitating optimal bone regeneration. At 106 days, it was possible to achieve good primary stability of endosseous implants, although lacking functional loading.
2013	Khairy et al. [53]	Evaluation of bone quality in sinuses augmented with autogenous bone, with or without platelet-rich plasma (PRP) mix.	In group “I”, five maxillary sinus lifts with autogenous bone augmentation and implant insertion were performed six months after grafting. Ten maxillary sinus lifts with autogenous bone augmentation were mixed with PRP, with implant insertion at 4 or 6 months post-grafting in Group II.	Six months after implant placement, Group II showed significantly higher mean bone density (p = 0.041). Histomorphometric analysis revealed that Group I had the highest mean value, and was statistically significant (39.5 ± 7.4; p = 0.003).	PRP did not reveal any significant impact on bone quality at 3 months after placement. Bone density was improved after 6 months.
2018	Nizam et al. [54]	Evaluation of the effects of leukocyte- and platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) combined with deproteinised bovine bone mineral (DBBM) on bone regeneration in maxillary sinus augmentation.	Twenty-six maxillary sinus augmentation procedures were randomly divided into a test group (DBBM + L-PRF) and control group (DBBM alone in a split-mouth design).	No significant differences in the evaluated parameters were observed.	Both techniques were effective for maxillary sinus augmentation. After six months of healing, adding L-PRF to DBBM did not improve the amount of regenerated bone or the amount of the graft integrated under histological and histomorphometric evaluation.