Introduction: The preservation of bone volume immediately after tooth removal is necessary to optimize the success of implant placement in terms of esthetics and function. The objectives of this study were to compare the ability of Choukroun’s platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) versus CollaPlug (Zimmer) in maintaining the buccal bone height of sockets following extractions in patients.
Materials and methods: Twenty patients who required tooth extraction and implant placement were enrolled in this study. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. They are group I PRF group and group II CollaPlug group. The vertical buccal crestal bone heights were measured immediately after extraction and 4 months postextraction and implants were placed.
Results: The buccal crestal bone level in the CollaPlug group had a baseline mean of 4.67 ± 0.54 and a postmean of 6.98 ± 0.60, whereas in the PRF group baseline mean was 5.43 ± 0.47 and postmean was 6.93 ± 0.55. The bone resorption was found in both the groups (2.31 mm for CollaPlug and 1.5 mm for PRF), in agreement with previous studies. However, there was increased bone loss in CollaPlug group compared with PRF group, which was found statistically significant.
Conclusion: In conclusion, within the limits of the present study, the two tested socket preservation materials seem to be effective in the treatment of extraction sockets, even though the design of the study did not allow us to evaluate to what extent the clinical improvement could be attributed to the PRF per se, since a negative control was not included in this investigation. However, preparation of PRF is not very cumbersome and inexpensive, which makes it a better socket preservation material than CollaPlug.
Keywords: Choukroun’s platelet-rich fibrin, CollaPlug (Zimmer), Vertical buccal crestal bone heights.
How to cite this article: Madhan G, Singh M. Comparison of Ability of Platelet-rich Fibrin vs CollaPlug in maintaining the Buccal Bone Height of Sockets following Extractions in 20 Patients. J Health Sci Res 2017;8(1):1-6.
Source of support: Nil
Conflict of interest: None