SynthesisOral and maxillofacial surgery2026
Platelet-rich fibrin after mandibular third molar extraction: a split-mouth and parallel-group stratified meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
Synthesis in Oral and maxillofacial surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundPlatelet-rich fibrin (PRF) has been increasingly used as an autologous biomaterial to enhance healing after tooth extraction because of its potential to modulate inflammation, promote angiogenesis, and stimulate tissue regeneration. However, evidence regarding its effectiveness across postoperative outcomes remains heterogeneous, and the comparative performance of PRF subtypes, particularly leukocyte-platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) and advanced platelet-rich fibrin (A-PRF), is not fully established. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effects of PRF on postoperative outcomes following mandibular third molar extraction, with emphasis on postoperative pain and comparison of PRF subtypes.
methodsA systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was conducted from inception to March 2026. Randomized controlled trials comparing PRF with natural clot healing after mandibular third molar extraction were included. The primary outcome was postoperative pain. Secondary outcomes included alveolar osteitis (AO), edema, trismus, analgesic consumption, and bone-related outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models, and heterogeneity was evaluated with the I
resultsTwenty-eight studies were included. PRF significantly reduced the incidence of AO (RR = 0.17, 95% CI: 0.06-0.49), postoperative pain from day 1 to day 7, and analgesic consumption at postoperative days 2-3. Significant improvements were also observed in trismus at all assessed timepoints. Bone density, assessed descriptively across six studies due to substantial methodological heterogeneity in imaging methods, showed a consistent trend favoring PRF, although this could not be quantitatively pooled. Edema reduction was inconsistent, with only modest short-term benefits. L-PRF demonstrated more consistent effects across outcomes than A-PRF, although evidence for A-PRF was limited to a single trial. Heterogeneity was substantial in some analyses, likely due to differences in PRF protocols and outcome assessment methods.
conclusionPRF, particularly L-PRF, reduces postoperative morbidity after mandibular third molar extraction, although further standardized trials, particularly head-to-head comparisons of L-PRF and A-PRF, are needed to clarify subtype-specific effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42768126What 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.