Background: The primary purpose of this two-arm, parallel design, randomized controlled study is to compare healing of the palatal tissue donor site when platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) is used as a wound dressing compared to the use of a hemostatic agent. Secondary outcomes of patient pain perception and analgesic intake were also evaluated.
Methods: Seventy-four patients receiving free gingival grafts were randomized to receive either PRF (test) or hemostatic agent (control) as a palatal wound dressing by patients selecting a sealed envelope containing their group assignment (initially 37 envelopes for PRF group and 37 for hemostatic agent group). Patient pain assessment and analgesic consumption were documented using a 21-point numerical scale (NMRS-21) at 24, 48, and 72 hours post-surgery. At 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-week follow-up appointments palatal early healing index (PEHI) scores including wound color, epithelialization, presence or absence of swelling, granulation tissue, and bleeding on gentle palpation were generated by direct intraoral examination by a blinded examiner unaware of the patients' treatment group.
Results: NMRS-21 pain scores showed a significant reduction in pain over time in both groups, with no significant difference between groups at any time point. No significant between-group difference was found in the amount of analgesics taken by patients at 24, 48, and 72 hours. There was significant improvement in PEHI scores over the 4-week time period in both groups, but there was no significant difference in PEHI score at each time point (1, 2, 3, 4 weeks) between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Study findings suggest that there is no difference in early palatal wound healing, patient pain perception, or analgesic consumption between use of PRF or a hemostatic agent as donor-site wound dressings.
Keywords: hemostatics; pain; palate; platelet‐rich fibrin; tissue grafts; wound healing.
© 2024 American Academy of Periodontology.