SynthesisPeriodontology 20002025
Analgesic effects of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF): A systematic review.
Synthesis in Periodontology 2000, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers 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
- Current treatment concepts in implantology in oral and maxillofacial surgery in Germany.International journal of implant dentistry · 2026Article
- Patient-Centered Assessment of Palatal Donor Site Healing Using Platelet-Rich Fibrin Versus Collagen: A Randomized Controlled Trial.International journal of dentistry · 2026Article
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
backgroundPlatelet-rich fibrin (PRF), a second-generation autologous platelet concentrate, has gained significant interest for its anti-inflammatory and regenerative characteristics. While its role in tissue healing is well-recognized, the analgesic potential of PRF remains under-investigated.
aimThe primary objective of this systematic review was to critically evaluate any pain-reported outcome of PRF across all medical and dental procedures in human studies. The secondary objective was to also evaluate outcomes regarding swelling reduction with PRF and other patient-reported outcomes such as quality of life and analgesic consumption in all included studies.
methodsA systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases was performed for comparative clinical studies assessing PRF's influence on postoperative pain. Eligible studies included human clinical trials comparing PRF with non-PRF controls, with pain-reported outcomes as the primary outcome. Data on swelling and other patient-reported outcomes, including analgesic use and quality of life, was also evaluated as a secondary objective; however, studies that evaluated these outcomes alone were excluded. A total of 200 comparative clinical studies were included, covering a diverse range of procedures including third molar extractions, palatal wound healing, mucogingival procedures, periodontal/bone procedures, maxillary sinus lifts, endodontic procedures, orthodontic procedures, oral lesions, alveolar osteitis, oroantral communications, medically induced osteonecrosis of the jaw, temporomandibular joint disorders, orthopedic procedures, facial surgery and aesthetics, and other fields of medicine. However, heterogeneity in PRF preparation methods and outcome measures precluded a meta-analysis.
resultsAlmost all studies reported reduced pain levels in the PRF group compared with non-PRF controls, with additional benefits observed in terms of swelling reduction, decreased analgesic use, and improved patient-reported outcomes. Importantly, it was observed that procedures that tend to generate the most patient-reported pain, such as 3rd molar extractions and autogenous soft tissue grafting from the hard palate, generally reported much lower pain scores following PRF use (72%-85% of studies) and significantly reduced postoperative analgesic use (87.5% of studies).
conclusionsThe autologous nature of PRF, along with the sustained release of bioactive factors, likely plays a vital role in modulating inflammation and promoting tissue healing, hence enhancing patient comfort and recovery. As PRF continues to gain traction in clinical practice, integrating well-designed comparative studies with standardized outcome measures will be necessary to completely understand its therapeutic potential and inform evidence-based guidelines regarding its application.
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.