Question · asked by 1 review

Primary closure of the extraction socket with a mucoperiosteal flap vs Application of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) without primary closure: Complications and side effects

Population: People on antiresorptive treatment undergoing tooth extraction (at risk of MRONJ)
Intervention: Primary closure of the extraction socket with a mucoperiosteal flap
Comparison: Application of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) without primary closure
Outcome: Complications and side effects

What each review found

Finding	Effect	Studies	GRADE certainty
Primary closure of the extraction socket with a mucoperiosteal flap vs Application of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) without primary closure Rate of complications and side effects of the intervention · People on antiresorptive treatment undergoing tooth extraction (at risk of MRONJ) · 90 days Interventions for managing medication‐related osteonecrosis of the jaw (2022) · Cochrane All outcomes	No intraoperative complications occurred in either group. Postoperative complications: 6 participants (15.4%) in the mucoperiosteal flap group and 1 participant (2.6%) in the PRF group.	1 study · 77 participants	GRADE not reported

Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.

The reviews

Review	Searched up to	Included studies	AMSTAR 2
Interventions for managing medication‐related osteonecrosis of the jaw 2022 · Cochrane All outcomes	2021-06	Not listed	Not assessed

How reviews are matched to this question

Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.