L-PRF Versus A-PRF on Palatal Wound Healing

Comparison of The Effect of A-PRF and L-PRF Application to The Palatal Region on Quality of Life and Wound Healing After Free Gingival Graft Surgery

Different approaches are used to reduce post-operative complications associated with the palatal wound site after free gingival graft (FGG) harvesting. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of L-PRF and A-PRF on palatal wound healing after free gingival graft harvesting and patients' quality of life.

Thirty-six patients between the ages of 18 and 60 years (11 males and 25 females) who had completed Phase 1 periodontal treatments and for whom FGG surgery was indicated for isolated gingival recession defects limited to one or two teeth with shallow vestibule and insufficient keratinized or attached gingival width were included in the present study.

Three different treatments were performed on palatal wound areas: L-PRF (L-PRF group, n = 12), A-PRF (A-PRF group, n = 12) and palatal stent (control group, n = 12) OHIP-14 scores, VAS scores (for pain), analgesic tablet intake, and epithelialization condition were recorded for different time points.

Inclusion Criteria:

• Patients ≥18 years requiring FGG surgery because of shallow vestibule and insufficient keratinized/attached gingival width

Exclusion Criteria:

• no smoking /no alcohol use,
• not suffering from any systemic disease that could impair the healing of wounds,
• pregnancy or lactation,
• Previous graft harvesting from the same site.