[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-468605-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-468605-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","safety-and-feasibility-of-extended-plateletrich-fibrin-as-a-solo-barrier-membrane-for-ridge-preservation-a-case-series","Safety and Feasibility of Extended Platelet‐Rich Fibrin as a Solo Barrier Membrane for Ridge Preservation: A Case Series","","Platelet‐rich fibrin (PRF) is used for ridge preservation, yet standard formulations resorb in roughly 2 weeks, which may limit complete soft-tissue closure and allow cellular infiltration into the bony compartment. By heating plasma and denaturing albumin with Bio‐Heat, extended‐PRF (e‐PRF) resorption can be prolonged from weeks toward months. This human case series evaluated first-time safety and applicability of a 100% autologous e‐PRF membrane used alone as a barrier during ridge preservation.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/healthcare/","Healthcare",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/safety-and-feasibility-of-extended-plateletrich-fibrin-as-a-solo-barrier-membrane-for-ridge-preservation-a-case-series/468605/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/safety-and-feasibility-of-extended-plateletrich-fibrin-as-a-solo-barrier-membrane-for-ridge-preservation-a-case-series/468605.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Alex Sinclair","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-07","2026-09-30",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",9,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What problem with standard PRF motivates using extended‐PRF membranes?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"Standard PRF has a relatively short resorption period (about 2 weeks), which may be insufficient for complete soft-tissue closure and may allow soft-tissue cells to infiltrate the bony compartment.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How was the e‐PRF barrier membrane used in this case series?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"Sites were grafted using bone allograft plus standard PRF to create “sticky bone,” and the novel e‐PRF was placed as a solo barrier membrane instead of collagen or PTFE membranes.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"What were the observed healing and outcome findings?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"All extraction sites healed uneventfully without postoperative complications or clinical signs of infection. Ridge width and buccal/lingual height showed mean decreases over time, with reported values at 1, 3, and 5 mm apical to the crest.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},468605,1791088660,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,110,115,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":112,"show_sort_weight":113,"slug":114},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":107,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":111,"language":139,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":143,"read_time":117,"preview_page_count":4},1099523882182,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_6f874abed73319feea01a86fa6f0fab8","Clinical and Experimental Dental Research   \nORIGINAL ARTICLE   \nSafety and Feasibility of Extended Platelet‐Rich Fibrin as a Solo Barrier Membrane for Ridge Preservation: A Case Series  \nNathan E. Estrin1,2  | Troy B. Tran2 | Alan Rene Espinoza3 | Paras Ahmad4  | Nima Farshidfar5  | Ryan Holmes6,7 | Yufeng Zhang8  | Richard J. Miron4,5   \n1The University of Iowa College of Dentistry and Dental Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa, USA | 2Lake Erie College of Osteopathic Medicine School of Dental Medicine, Bradenton, Florida, USA | 3Private Practice, Global Dental Baja, Mexicali, Mexico | 4Department of Research, Advanced PRF Education, Florida, USA | 5Department of Periodontology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland | 6Private Practice, True View Dental Radiology PLLC, Boise, Idaho,  \nUSA | 7Private Practice, Holmes Dental Radiology and Forensics PLLC, Boise, Idaho, USA | 8Department of Oral Implantology, University of Wuhan, Wuhan, China  \nCorrespondence: Richard J. Miron ([rick@themironlab.com](rick@themironlab.com))  \nReceived: 12 August 2025 | Revised: 8 December 2025 | Accepted: 23 December 2025  \nKeywords: albumin‐gel | albumin‐PRF | Bio‐PRF | extended‐PRF | horizontal centrifugation | leukocyte and platelet‐rich fibrin | L‐PRF  \nABSTRACT  \nIntroduction: Platelet‐rich fibrin (PRF) has been commonly utilized for ridge preservation techniques either to introduce supraphysiological concentrations of autologous growth factors to the defect area (typically when mixed within a bone graft) or utilized alone as a solo “barrier” membrane. Noteworthy, however, one of the commonly reported drawbacks of PRF is its relatively short resorption period characterized by lasting roughly 2 weeks. This may therefore be insufficient for complete soft tissue closure and/or preventing soft tissue cells from infiltrating into the bony compartment. Recently, it was discovered that by heating plasma and denaturing albumin using the Bio‐Heat technology, the resorption properties of PRF could be extended from a standard 2–3 week period toward 4–6 months. The aim of the present human case series was to investigate for the first time the safety and applicability of utilizing this novel 100% autologous extended‐PRF (e‐PRF) membrane for ridge preservation.  \nMaterials and Methods: Twenty‐two patients requiring 22 single tooth posterior extractions were included in this case series. In all cases, atraumatic extractions were performed, and the sites were grafted using a combination of bone allograft and standard PRF to create “sticky bone.” Noteworthy, the barrier membrane utilized over top of the bone graft was the novel e‐PRF, which was utilized as a solo membrane in place of standard collagen or polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) membranes. Cone‐beam computed tomography scans were taken immediately after extractions and at 3 months postoperatively. Ridge width at 1, 3, and 5 mm apical to the crest, and buccal and lingual height dimensions were recorded at both time intervals. Additionally, buccal bone thickness at 1, 3, and 5 mm apical to the crest was recorded at baseline.  \nResults: All extraction sites healed uneventfully without any postoperative complications. No clinical signs of infection or other complications were detected. The mean change in ridge width at 1, 3, and 5 mm apical to the crest was −1.27 ± 0.70,−0.94 ± 0.80, and −0.69 ± 0.79 mm, respectively. The mean change in buccal height and lingual height was −1.25 ± 1.16 and −0.94 ± 1.07 mm, respectively.  \nConclusions: The use of e‐PRF membranes in place of collagen membranes for ridge preservation was shown to be an effective, safe, and predictable treatment modality. The e‐PRF membranes can be fabricated at low cost with a barrier function that resorbs much more slowly over time when compared to standard PRF membranes. While this preliminary report  \nThis is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any med","cbCaitruVM6MXhDk","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaitruVM6MXhDk","pdf",1406295,"English","# Abstract\n## Introduction\n## Materials and Methods\n## Results\n## Conclusions\n## Clinical Relevance\n# 1 | Introduction","[{\"question\":\"What problem with standard PRF motivates using extended‐PRF membranes?\",\"answer\":\"Standard PRF has a relatively short resorption period (about 2 weeks), which may be insufficient for complete soft-tissue closure and may allow soft-tissue cells to infiltrate the bony compartment.\"},{\"question\":\"How was the e‐PRF barrier membrane used in this case series?\",\"answer\":\"Sites were grafted using bone allograft plus standard PRF to create “sticky bone,” and the novel e‐PRF was placed as a solo barrier membrane instead of collagen or PTFE membranes.\"},{\"question\":\"What were the observed healing and outcome findings?\",\"answer\":\"All extraction sites healed uneventfully without postoperative complications or clinical signs of infection. Ridge width and buccal/lingual height showed mean decreases over time, with reported values at 1, 3, and 5 mm apical to the crest.\"}]","Safety and Feasibility of Extended Platelet‐Rich Fibrin as a Solo Barrier Membrane for Ridge Preservation: A Case Series | PDF",1790774449]