ArticleClinical implant dentistry and related research2025
Effects of i-PRF, A-PRF+, and EMD on Osteogenic Potential of Osteoblasts on Titanium.
Article in Clinical implant dentistry and related research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe study evaluates three biologically active substances with known bone-inductive potential on previously decontaminated titanium (Ti) discs. MATERIAL AND
methodsRough and smooth Ti surfaces were contaminated with a multispecies biofilm and cleaned with a chitosan brush. Discs were treated either with injectable-platelet-rich fibrin (i-PRF), advanced platelet-rich fibrin (A-PRF+), or enamel matrix derivatives (EMDs) before osteoblast seeding.
resultsBiocompatibility, adhesion, migration, and gene expression of runt-related transcription factor 2 (RUNX2), collagen Type I Alpha 2 (COL1a2), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), osteocalcin (OC), and osteonectin (ON) were performed. All the tested biologic agents similarly increased cell viability. Specifically, osteoblasts seeded over i-PRF and EMD-treated surfaces showed improvement in adhesion and migration and significantly increased ALP, OC, ON, RUNX-2, and COL1a2 mRNA levels up to 2.8 fold (p < 0.05) with no differences between Ti surfaces.
conclusionsi-PRF and EMD possess beneficial bioactive properties that enhance tissue healing and promote regeneration on thoroughly sterilized surfaces. Biologically active materials may hold the potential to influence the process of implant re-osseointegration, which warrants more research since sterilization of the affected surfaces under clinical conditions is still not reliably possible and remains one of the greatest challenges.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.