Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesAnimal StudyPubMed

Comparison of the Effect of Platelet-rich Plasma (PRP) and Fat Graft on Autologous Bone Grafting in a Randomized-controlled Experimental Skull Model.

Gunes D., Oksuz S., Koseoglu RD., Gokce E.

Animal Study on Chronic Wound, published in J Craniofac Surg (2024) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Animal Study
Journal
J Craniofac Surg (2024)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
38710066
DOI
10.1097/SCS.0000000000010166

Abstract (original English)

Gold standard method for the treatment of critical-sized bone defects is the autogenous bone grafting procedure. A number of new and potentially useful adjuncts currently are being investigated to enhance the success of bone grafting. We propose to evaluate the effect of the most known and easily obtained 2 biological materials, fat graft and platelet-rich plasma (PRP), on bone graft healing. Twenty-seven New Zealand male rabbits were included in this randomized, controlled study. Two-sided 15-mm diameter bone defects were created in the parietal bones and the bones taken were replaced right-to-left and vice versa with 1 control group, 1 fat graft applied group, and the last one PRP applied group. Histologic evaluation and 3-dimensional maxillofacial computerized tomography were performed and bone density was calculated. In radiologic analysis, bone density was significantly different in the PRP group compared with the control and fat graft group in the 12th week ( P <0.05). In histologic scoring analysis, the PRP group had a better score than the control and fat graft group, while the fat graft group was worse than the control group in the 6th week ( P <0.05). The addition of PRP had a positive effect whereas fat graft had a negative effect on bone graft healing compared with the control group.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is preclinical work; animal or laboratory results cannot be applied to humans.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence
AnimalsPlatelet-Rich PlasmaRabbitsBone TransplantationMaleAdipose TissueRandom AllocationBone DensityTransplantation, AutologousWound Healing

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research