| Nome: | Descrição: | Tamanho: | Formato: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Projeto de pós-graduação_2022108914 | 1.07 MB | Adobe PDF |
Autores
Orientador(es)
Resumo(s)
A recessão gengival é uma condição clínica comum que afeta a estética, a função e o conforto oral. Esta revisão sistemática teve como objetivo avaliar se o uso de fibrina rica em plaquetas (PRF) melhora a taxa de cobertura radicular completa, a estética e reduz a morbidade pós-operatória em comparação com o enxerto de tecido conjuntivo (CTG). A metodologia foi baseada numa pesquisa nas bases de dados PubMed, Cochrane Library e B-On. A seleção dos estudos seguiu os critérios PRISMA, aplicando critérios de inclusão e exclusão previamente definidos. Foram analisados oito ensaios clínicos randomizados publicados entre 2014 e 2024. O risco de viés foi avaliado com a ferramenta do Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). Os estudos incluídos demonstraram que o CTG apresenta melhores resultados em termos de cobertura radicular completa e espessura dos tecidos, especialmente quando associado a técnicas cirúrgicas como Coronally Advanced Flap (CAF) e Vestibular Incision Subperiosteal Tunnel Access (VISTA). No entanto, o PRF mostrou-se clinicamente eficaz em casos de recessões menos extensas, com vantagens claras na redução da dor, menor tempo cirúrgico e melhor aceitação por parte dos pacientes. Em termos estéticos, ambos os biomateriais apresentaram bons resultados subjetivos, com ligeira preferência dos pacientes pelo PRF devido ao menor desconforto. A comparação entre PRF e CTG no tratamento da recessão gengival sugere que ambas as abordagens são eficazes, embora com indicações clínicas distintas. A escolha do biomaterial deve considerar o biotipo gengival, a extensão da recessão, a tolerância à dor e as expectativas do paciente. Estudos futuros com amostras maiores, seguimento a longo prazo e padronização na preparação do PRF são essenciais para reforçar a evidência atual e apoiar decisões clínicas baseadas em resultados mais robustos.
Gingival recession is a common clinical condition that affects aesthetics, function, and oral comfort. This systematic review aimed to assess whether the use of Platelet-Rich Fibrin (PRF) improves the rate of complete root coverage, aesthetics, and reduces postoperative morbidity compared to connective tissue grafts (CTG). The methodology was based on a literature search in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and B-On databases. Study selection followed the PRISMA guidelines, applying predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Eight randomized clinical trials published between 2014 and 2024 were analyzed. The risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) tool. The included studies showed that CTG yields better outcomes in terms of complete root coverage and tissue thickness, especially when combined with surgical techniques such as Coronally Advanced Flap (CAF) and Vestibular Incision Subperiosteal Tunnel Access (VISTA). However, PRF proved to be clinically effective in cases of less extensive recessions, offering clear advantages in pain reduction, shorter surgical time, and greater patient acceptance. In aesthetic terms, both biomaterials presented good subjective results, with a slight patient preference for PRF due to its lower discomfort. The comparison between PRF and CTG in the treatment of gingival recession suggests that both approaches are effective, although with distinct clinical indications. The choice of biomaterial should take into account the gingival biotype, the extent of the recession, the patient’s pain tolerance, and their expectations. Future studies with larger sample sizes, long-term follow-up, and standardization in PRF preparation are essential to strengthen the current evidence and support clinical decision-making based on more robust outcomes.
Gingival recession is a common clinical condition that affects aesthetics, function, and oral comfort. This systematic review aimed to assess whether the use of Platelet-Rich Fibrin (PRF) improves the rate of complete root coverage, aesthetics, and reduces postoperative morbidity compared to connective tissue grafts (CTG). The methodology was based on a literature search in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and B-On databases. Study selection followed the PRISMA guidelines, applying predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Eight randomized clinical trials published between 2014 and 2024 were analyzed. The risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) tool. The included studies showed that CTG yields better outcomes in terms of complete root coverage and tissue thickness, especially when combined with surgical techniques such as Coronally Advanced Flap (CAF) and Vestibular Incision Subperiosteal Tunnel Access (VISTA). However, PRF proved to be clinically effective in cases of less extensive recessions, offering clear advantages in pain reduction, shorter surgical time, and greater patient acceptance. In aesthetic terms, both biomaterials presented good subjective results, with a slight patient preference for PRF due to its lower discomfort. The comparison between PRF and CTG in the treatment of gingival recession suggests that both approaches are effective, although with distinct clinical indications. The choice of biomaterial should take into account the gingival biotype, the extent of the recession, the patient’s pain tolerance, and their expectations. Future studies with larger sample sizes, long-term follow-up, and standardization in PRF preparation are essential to strengthen the current evidence and support clinical decision-making based on more robust outcomes.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Plasma rico em plaquetas Enxerto de tecido conjuntivo Recessão gengival Recobrimento radicular Platelet rich fibrin Connective tissue graft Gingival recession Root coverage