Introduction This study aimed to compare the regenerative potential and soft tissue healing outcomes of Simvastatin-impregnated gel foam and Platelet-Rich Fibrin (PRF) following mandibular molar extraction. Methods Forty patients undergoing mandibular molar extraction were randomly allocated into two groups: Simvastatin-impregnated gel foam (Group A) and PRF (Group B). Outcomes assessed included postoperative pain (Visual Analog Scale, VAS), soft tissue healing (Landry’s scale), bone regeneration (Cone Beam Computed Tomography, CBCT), and postoperative complications. Statistical analyses included t-tests and Chi-square tests. Results Demographic characteristics were comparable between groups. The mean extraction times were similar ( p =0.67). Postoperative pain scores decreased over time without significant differences between groups ( p >0.05). Soft tissue healing scores showed no significant differences across time points ( p >0.05). However, bone density at three months postoperatively was significantly greater in the Simvastatin group (422±30 HU) than in the PRF group (411±28 HU) ( p =0.01). Minimal postoperative complications occurred, with slightly fewer in the Simvastatin group. Discussion Simvastatin-impregnated gel foam showed superior bone regeneration compared to PRF in alveolar ridge preservation after mandibular molar extraction. Both materials effectively reduced postoperative pain and improved soft tissue healing. Simvastatin’s enhanced osteogenic, anti-inflammatory, and antimicrobial effects indicate it as a promising, minimally invasive option for superior bone healing and socket preservation. Conclusion Both Simvastatin-impregnated gel foam and PRF effectively promoted alveolar ridge preservation, though Simvastatin demonstrated superior bone regenerative capabilities. Clinical Trial Number REF/2024/10/074804
Kanabar et al. (Mon,) studied this question.