|
| Authors (Year) | Animal model | Study Group(s) | Control group | Preparation protocol of PDBs | The application method of PDBs | Method of evaluation | Main outcomes | Follow-up | References |
|
| Bone regeneration for bony defects |
| Engler-pinto et al. (2019) | OVX rats | I: PRF
II: Xenograft
III: PRF + xenograft | Unfilled artificial defects | 3.5 ml blood centrifuged at 2700 g in 12 min | 0.1 mL of materials inserted into an artificial calvaria defect | I: micro-CT
II: Histology
III: Immunohistochemistry | PRP + xenograft exhibited the best outcomes in bone formation and upregulated osteogenic gene expression | 4 months postoperatively | [57] |
| Rocha et al., (2017) | OVX rabbits | I: PRP + collagen sponge
II: MSCs + collagen sponge
III: PRP + MSCs + collagen sponge | Collagen sponge | Blood was added to calcium gluconate and centrifuged at 1500 rpm for 4 min | PRP with the cellular content of 1 × 106 platelets loaded on 3 mm fragments of collagen sponge artificial tibia defect | I: Radiographic optical densitometry
II: Histology | The sole application of MSCs exerted better outcomes compared to PRP or PRP + MSCs groups | 30 and 60 days postoperatively | [58] |
| Sakata et al. (2017) | OVX rats | I: PRP + gelatin + β-TCP
II: PBS + gelatin + β-TCP | Unfilled artificial defects | 8 ml blood + 2 ml EDT centrifuged at: 2000 g in 10 min
Followed by: 1000 g in 15 min | Materials implanted into lumbar vertebral body defect | I: micro-CT
II: Histology
III: Biomechanical testing | PRP + gelatin + β-TCP induced statistically significant bone regeneration ( < 0.05) and it also exerted significantly higher stiffness ( < 0.05) | 4, 8, and 12 weeks postoperatively | [21] |
| Wei et al. (2016) | OVX rats | I: PRP
II: BMSCs
III: PRP + BMSCs | I: Non-OVX rats receiving PBS
II: OVX rats receiving PBS | Blood + heparin centrifuged at: 215 g in 10 min
Followed by: 863 g in 10 min at 20°C | Material implantation in an artificial defect in the tibia | I: microCT
II: Histology
III: Gene expression | Groups treated with PRP and PRP + BMSCs exhibited the best outcomes in bone regeneration and osteogenic gene upregulation | 42 days postoperatively | [59] |
| Cho et al. (2014) | OVX rats | I: Poly-methylmethacrylate
II: CPC
III: CPC + PRP | Unfilled artificial defects | 8 ml blood + EDTA saline centrifuged at: 200 g in 10 min
Plasma portion centrifuged at: 400 g in 15 min | Material implantation in an artificial defect in caudal vertebral body | I: micro-CT
II: Histology | Higher trabecular bone volume fraction, trabecular thickness, BMD, and overall bone regeneration | 2 weeks postoperatively | [60] |
|
| Bone regeneration for implant osseointegration |
| Omar et al., (2021) | OVX rabbits | I: Implant + calcitonin
II: Implant + calcitonin + PRF | Implant without PRF and calcitonin | 8 mL centrifuged at 3000 rpm for 10 min | PRF implanted in the osteotomized tibia site before implant placement | I: SEM
II: EDX | The combined application of implant + calcitonin + PRF resulted in high bone-to-implant contact and less gap between the implant and the bone | 12 weeks postoperatively | [61] |
| Sun et al., (2021) | OVX rats | I: Implant + CaP
II: Implant + PRP
III: Implant + CaP + PRP | Implant without PRP | 16 mL blood centrifuged at 180 g for 10 min
Followed by: Centrifugation at 1000 g for 10 min | PRP injected into the bone marrow cavity of tibia followed by implants positioning in the tibia medullary canal | I: micro-CT
II: Biomechanical test
III: Histology | The combined application of implant + PRP + CaP resulted in the highest outcomes in terms of implant stabilization | 12 weeks postoperatively | [62] |
| Qiao et al., (2020) | OVX rabbits | I: 3D—printed pTi + PRP
II: 3D—printed pTi + freeze-dried PRP | 3D—printed pTi implants | 5 mL blood centrifuged at 209 g for 16 min
Followed by centrifugation at 1500 g for 12 min | pTi was immersed in PRP for 5 min followed by the addition of thrombin and CaCl2 | I: Cell viability
II: Osteogenic differentiation
III: micro-CT
IV: Histology | The coating of freeze-dried PRP showed superior cell activity and osteogenic potential compared to conventional PRP | 6 and 12 weeks postoperatively | [63] |
| Zhu et al. (2016) | OVX rats | I: TiO2 implant
II: Control implant + PRP
III: TiO2 implant + PRP | Unfilled artificial defects | Blood centrifuged at: 180 g in 10 min
Followed by: 1000 g in 10 min [65] | Implant insertion and PRP injection inside the tibia bone marrow cavity | I: Field-emission SEM
II: AFM
III: XRD
IV: micro-CT
V: Histology
VI: Biomechanical testing
VII: SEM | PRP could enhance osteogenesis earlier than TiO2 implant; however, the best outcomes were achieved in PRP + TiO2 implant group | 12 weeks postoperatively | [64] |
|
