Table 2.
Included studies: implant stability quotient (ISQ).
| Study(year), Funding | Studydesign, duration | No.of patients(implants) | PRF preparation | Group T:test C:control |
Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R.Tabrizi(2018) International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery |
RCT, split‐mouth 6 weeks |
20 (40implants) | 2800 rpm for 12 min Hardware |
T:PRF n = 20 No PRF n = 20 |
At 2 weeks after insertion, the mean ISQ was 60.60 ± 3.42 in group 1 and 58.25 ± 3.64 in group 2. There was a statistically signifificant difference between the two groups (P = 0.04). At 4 weeks after insertion, the mean ISQ was 70.30 ± 3.36 in group 1 and 67.15 ± 4.33 in group 2. Analysis of the data demonstrated a signifificant difference between the two groups at this time point (P = 0.014). The mean ISQ was 78.45 ± 3.36 in group 1 and 76.15 ± 2.94 in group 2 at 6 weeks afterinsertion. Assessment of the data showed a signifificant difference between group 1 and group 2 at this time point (P = 0.027) |
| Elif Öncü(2017) Periodontics Restorative Dentistry |
RCT, split‐mouth 1 year |
26 (60implants) | 2700 rpm for 12 min Hardware PRF membranes |
T:PRF n = 30 C:No PRF n = 30 |
T: t0:26.10 ± 12.83 t1:54.39 ± 15.88 t2:69.99 ± 11.87 t3:71.19 ± 10.31; C: t0:24.61 ± 11.97 t1:48.67 ± 13.61 t2:61.03 ± 12.02 t3:70.08 ± 11.2 |
| Elton Carlo Pichotano(2018) Journal of Oral Implantology |
RCT, split‐mouth 8 months |
12 (38implants) | 10 min at 300 g (3000 rpm) | T:PRF n = 19 C:No PRF n = 19 |
3.group showed statistically higher ISQ values compared to the test group (75.13 ± 5.69; and 60.90 ± 9.35 for the control and test group, respectively). This outcome might be attributed to the difference in the healing time between both groups. According to a previous study,31 ISQ values after sinus augmentation utilizing L-PRF progressively increase over time, meaning that the time for implant healing play a crucial role for increased secondary implant stability. This was confirmed in our studies because the ISQ values at loading demonstrated a significant increase in the test group compared to the initial value immediately at implant placement (60.90 ± 9.35 and 76.08 ± 5.86).T:P = 0.0014 C:P = 0.9927 |
| Elif Öncü(2015) The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants |
RCT, 1 months |
20 (64implants) | 2700 rpm for 12 min | T:PRF n = 31 C:No PRF n = 33 |
T: t0:59.39 ± 15.88 t1:69.29 ± 10.51 t2:77.19 ± 6.06 C: t0:62.67 ± 13.61 t1:60.03 ± 12.2 t2:70.49 ± 7.74 P1 = 0.002 P2 = 0.001 |
| XIE Hui(2018) Shanghai Journal of Stomatology |
RCT, 1 year |
46(46 implants) | 700 rpm for 3min | NR | T: t0 = 50.68 ± 5.17 t1 = 72.31 ± 5.06 C: t0 = 72.31 ± 5.06 t1 = 73.98 ± 5.38 t0 = 4 months t1 = 6 months P1=(P＜0.05)，P2=(P＞0.05)(4 months/6months) |
| C. Diana, S.Mohanty(2018) International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery |
RCT, 1 year |
29 (41 implant) | 2700 rpm for 12min | T:PRF n = 21 C:No PRF n = 20 |
T: t0 = 56.58 ± 18.81 t1:60.61 ± 11.49 C: t0 = 71.32 ± 7.82 t1:70.06 ± 8.69 |
| Ebru Olgun(2018) Journal of Investigative and Clinical Dentistry |
RCT, 6 months |
18 (37 implants) | 2800 rpm for 12min | T:PRF n = 10 C:No PRF n = 8 |
T:68.50 ± 8.87 C:66.37 ± 8.31 P = 0.611 |
| Ali H. Abbas Alhussaini (2019) The Journal of Craniofacial Surgery |
RCT, 12 weeks |
32(102 implants) | 3000 rpm for 12 min | T:PRF n = 27 C:No PRF n = 51 |
No significant statistical difference existed in primary implant stability between the groups (P = 0.054). An improvement in implant stability was observed in the PRF group(ISQ = 71.0 ± 7.3) compared with control group(ISQ = 67.2 ± 8.2) 6 weeks after implant insertion. After 12 weeks, implant stability was further enhanced in the PRF group (ISQ = 74.5 ± 8.1) compared with control group(ISQ = 70.8 ± 8.3). |
| Romesh Soni(2020) National Journal of Maxillofacial Surgery |
RCT, 4 months |
16(16 implants) | 1300 rpm for 8 min | T:PRF n = 8 C: No PRF n = 8 |
PRF membrane group’s average ISQ ranged from 38.5 to 61 (mean = 43.06,SD = 7.41) at baseline and ranged 66.5–71.5(mean = 69.12,SD = 1.78) at second-stage surgery. Collagen membrane group’s average ISQ ranged from 34.5 to 40.5 (mean = 41.68, SD = 7.2) at baseline and ranged 65.5–71.5(mean = 68.56,SD = 1.52) at second-stage surgery. |
| Kapoor A(2022) Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology |
RCT, 1 months |
21(60implants) | 3000 rpm for 10 min | T:PRF n = 30 C:No PRF n = 30 |
There was a statistically significant difference seen for values between two groups (P < 0.05) with higher ISQ values in Group 1, 59.56 ± 4.51, than Group 2, 57.12 ± 3.82 at 1 month. |
Note. RCT, randomized controlled clinical trial; SD, standard deviation; NR, not reported; w/wo, with or without; wo, without; SS, statistical significant difference; NS, no statistical difference; ISQ, Implant stability quotient.