ReviewPeriodontology 20002025
Use of liquid platelet-rich fibrin (liquid PRF) in temporomandibular joint disorders: A narrative review with clinical recommendations.
Review in Periodontology 2000, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Fibrin and Enamel Matrix Derivative As Adjuncts to Non-Surgical Periodontal Therapy: A Split-Mouth Randomised Clinical Trial.Oral health & preventive dentistry · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis narrative review aimed to gather evidence from comparative and non-comparative clinical studies to assess: (1) whether the administration of liquid platelet-rich fibrin (liquid PRF) provides any clinical benefits for managing temporomandibular disorders (TMD), and if so, based on comparative clinical studies, (2) whether it offers more benefits than no treatment or other treatment modalities, either as a standalone therapy or as an adjunct. MATERIALS AND
methodsTo compile all relevant data, we performed a systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, supplemented by a Google Scholar search for gray literature and a manual screening of reference lists from eligible studies and relevant reviews, up to April 22, 2025. A total of 23 clinical studies (19 comparative and 4 non-comparative) were ultimately included in this review.
resultsAcross the included studies, the administration of liquid PRF has been shown to have beneficial effects in reducing pain and enhancing maximum mouth opening (MMO) in patients with TMD. In the majority of studies, the adjunctive use of liquid PRF following arthrocentesis demonstrated greater positive effects compared with arthrocentesis alone. When used adjunctively with arthrocentesis, liquid PRF also showed comparable or superior clinical outcomes in terms of pain reduction and MMO improvement compared with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA).
conclusionsBased on these findings, the administration of liquid PRF following arthrocentesis appears to be a promising approach for the management of TMD. To support clinical application, this review also presented a step-by-step protocol to guide dental and medical practitioners in the effective use of liquid PRF in patients with TMD. However, further well-designed randomized clinical trials with standardized methodologies are required to strengthen the evidence base and confirm the therapeutic benefits of liquid PRF in the management of TMD due to the high variability among the included studies.
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.