Trial reportOral health & preventive dentistry2026
Platelet-Rich Fibrin with Minocycline versus Arestin in Non-surgical Periodontal Therapy: A Split-Mouth Randomised Controlled Clinical Trial.
Trial report in Oral health & preventive dentistry, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePeriodontitis is a chronic inflammatory disease and while non-surgical periodontal therapy (NSPT) remains the first choice of treatment, its capability to completely resolve inflammation may be limited. Arestin® (1 mg minocycline microsphere) is an established adjunct, whereas platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) has recently emerged as a promising local drug-delivery scaffold. This split-mouth randomised controlled clinical trial compared the clinical efficacy of adjunctive minocycline delivered via conventional Arestin® versus incorporation within a PRF scaffold for the treatment of 4-6 mm periodontal pockets after NSPT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fifteen participants were recruited, of whom 13 completed the 6-month follow-up. Each patient contributed two interproximal sites randomly allocated to receive either adjunctive PRF + Minocycline or adjunctive Arestin® after NSPT. Periodontal parameters, such as probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), gingival recession (GR), and bleeding on probing (BOP), were measured at baseline and 6 months.
resultsBoth adjunctive approaches yielded statistically significant intra-group enhancements. Mean PD reductions were 1.13 ± 0.15 mm in the PRF + Minocycline group and 1.00 ± 0.67 mm in the Arestin® group. CAL gains were 1.02 ± 0.66 mm and 1.08 ± 0.61, respectively. Most sites in both groups showed CAL gains of 1 - 2 mm (61.5%), whereas 15.4% of sites attained a residual PD of 3 mm at 6 months. Inter-group comparisons revealed no statistically significant differences for PD (p = 0.609), GR (p = 0.096), or CAL (p = 0.789).
conclusionThese findings suggest that PRF + Minocycline yielded comparable short-term outcomes to Arestin® as adjunctive treatments during NSPT. Therefore, treatment selection may be based on clinician preference, patient-related factors, cost, availability, and handling characteristics. Larger RCTs with longer follow-up are necessary to confirm these findings.
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.