ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND@#Autologous platelet concentrates such as platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) have gained overwhelming popularity in regenerative endodontics. Clinical evidence reveals the lack of a particular advantage of using PRP or PRF over an evoked blood clot in promoting canal wall thickening and/or continued root development in immature necrotic teeth. Moreover, despite stimulating tissue repair and repopulating the root canals of immature and mature permanent teeth, the new vital tissue may not possess the functional activity of the native pulp tissue. @*METHODS@#To better understand the origin, nature, and long-term fate of the tissue types found within the pulp space, we critically examine all available histo-/morphological evidence for pulp–dentine complex regeneration using PRP and/or PRF, alone or together with an evoked blood clot, specialised or unspecialised primary cells, and other biomaterials. @*RESULTS@#Histological data from clinical studies is scant. Reportedly, the inner dentinal surface supports cementum-like tissue formation, but this interface likely deviates in structure and function from the native cementodentinal junction.Presence of bone-like tissue within the pulp space is intriguing since de novo osteogenesis requires closely coordinated recruitment and differentiation of osteoprogenitor cells. Compared to untreated necrotic teeth, an evoked blood clot (with/ without PRF) improves fracture resistance. Tooth regeneration using PRF and dental bud cells is unreliable and the constituent neoformed tissues are poorly organised. @*CONCLUSION@#PRP/PRF fail to demonstrate a significant advantage over an induced blood clot, alone. The true nature of neoformed tissues remains poorly characterised while their response to subsequent insult/injury is unexplored.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND@#Autologous platelet concentrates such as platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) have gained overwhelming popularity in regenerative endodontics. Clinical evidence reveals the lack of a particular advantage of using PRP or PRF over an evoked blood clot in promoting canal wall thickening and/or continued root development in immature necrotic teeth. Moreover, despite stimulating tissue repair and repopulating the root canals of immature and mature permanent teeth, the new vital tissue may not possess the functional activity of the native pulp tissue. @*METHODS@#To better understand the origin, nature, and long-term fate of the tissue types found within the pulp space, we critically examine all available histo-/morphological evidence for pulp–dentine complex regeneration using PRP and/or PRF, alone or together with an evoked blood clot, specialised or unspecialised primary cells, and other biomaterials. @*RESULTS@#Histological data from clinical studies is scant. Reportedly, the inner dentinal surface supports cementum-like tissue formation, but this interface likely deviates in structure and function from the native cementodentinal junction.Presence of bone-like tissue within the pulp space is intriguing since de novo osteogenesis requires closely coordinated recruitment and differentiation of osteoprogenitor cells. Compared to untreated necrotic teeth, an evoked blood clot (with/ without PRF) improves fracture resistance. Tooth regeneration using PRF and dental bud cells is unreliable and the constituent neoformed tissues are poorly organised. @*CONCLUSION@#PRP/PRF fail to demonstrate a significant advantage over an induced blood clot, alone. The true nature of neoformed tissues remains poorly characterised while their response to subsequent insult/injury is unexplored.