Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 6, 2026
Characterization of Leukocyte-platelet Rich Fibrin, A Novel Biomaterial
Published on: September 29, 2015
Titanium-Prepared Versus Leukocyte Platelet-Rich Fibrin With Demineralized Freeze-Dried Bone Allograft in Periodontal
Sohini Chakraborty1, Ellora Madan1, Purushottam Kumar1
1Department of Periodontology, Kothiwal Dental College and Research Centre, Moradabad, IND.
Introduction:
Periodontal intrabony defects represent a major challenge in regenerative therapy, owing to the significant loss of supporting bone and attachment. Platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) variants, including leukocyte-PRF (L-PRF) and titanium-prepared PRF (T-PRF), are autologous second-generation concentrates that enhance healing through the sustained release of growth factors, while demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft (DFDBA) provides an osteoinductive and osteoconductive scaffold. The aim of the present study was to compare the clinical and radiographic efficacy of T-PRF + DFDBA versus L-PRF + DFDBA in the regenerative treatment of periodontal intrabony defects over six months using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and clinical parameters.
Methods:
This prospective observational study included 80 intrabony defect sites in systemically healthy patients (40 sites per group). The sites were assigned to Group A (T-PRF + DFDBA) or Group B (L-PRF + DFDBA) based on clinical judgment and feasibility. The probing pocket depth (PPD), clinical attachment level (CAL), and early healing index were recorded at baseline, three months, and six months. Intrabony defect depth, crestal level, and bone fill were assessed via CBCT at baseline and six months. Data were analyzed using repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA), paired t-test, and independent t-test.
Results:
Both groups showed highly significant intragroup improvements in PPD, CAL, intrabony defect depth, crestal level, and bone fill over six months (p < 0.001). Intergroup comparisons revealed no statistically significant differences in PPD (baseline: 7.82 ± 0.90 mm vs 7.77 ± 0.86 mm; 6 months: 2.86 ± 0.56 mm vs 2.95 ± 1.05 mm), CAL, early healing score (1.36 ± 0.49 vs 1.23 ± 0.42; p = 0.327), bone fill (1.73 ± 1.35 mm vs 1.75 ± 1.07 mm; p = 0.961), crestal level gain, or intrabony defect reduction at any time point (all p > 0.05).
Conclusions:
T-PRF + DFDBA and L-PRF + DFDBA provided comparable and clinically meaningful regenerative outcomes in periodontal intrabony defects over six months, with no evidence of superiority of one approach over the other. The dominant role of DFDBA likely accounts for the equivalence observed, supporting the interchangeable clinical use of either PRF variant as an adjunct to DFDBA for routine periodontal regeneration.
