Polyphosphate-crosslinked collagen scaffolds for hemostasis and alveolar bone regeneration after tooth extraction

To overcome autograft use for dental implantation, it is important to prevent bone loss after tooth extraction or to restore alveolar bone level after pathological diseases. Biphasic calcium phosphate (BCP), mixture of HA and ß-TCP, have proven its performance in orthopaedic, while few studies have been reported in dentistry. We reported 5 years clinical follow up on bone regeneration after immediate dental root filling. MBCP 60/40 and MBCP 20/80 are biphasic CaP intimate mixture of HA/TCP 60/40 and 20/80; with interconnected macroporosity and microporosity. Forty cases have been distributed in two groups for alveolar pocket filling. Seven cases without filling are used as control. X-Ray at 0, 3, 6, 12 months and 5 years follow up for some patients were performed. In all the 40 cases, radio-opacity of the implantation area decreases on time, indicating resorption and bone ingrowths at the expense of the two bioceramics. No difference in the resorption kinetics appeared on X-Ray. After 1 year, the implantation area looks as physiological bone and is maintained on time. The newly formed bone is preserved after 5 years contrarily to the controls cases (without filling)where we observed decrease of 2 to 5 mm. This study demonstrated that immediate filling of alveolar pocket after tooth extraction is a preventive method of the jaw bone resorption. After long term (other one year) resorption and bone ingrowth were demonstrated for both micro and macroporous biphasic calcium phosphate with two different HA/TCP ratio.

Download Full-text

Tissue Engineering for Bone Regeneration Using Differentiated Alveolar Bone Cells in Collagen Scaffolds

Tissue Engineering ◽

10.1089/10763270360728071 ◽

2003 ◽

Vol 9 (6) ◽

pp. 1167-1177 ◽

Cited By ~ 86

Author(s):

Y. Xiao ◽

H. Qian ◽

W.G. Young ◽

P.M. Bartold

Keyword(s):

Tissue Engineering ◽

Bone Regeneration ◽

Alveolar Bone ◽

Bone Cells ◽

Collagen Scaffolds ◽

Alveolar Bone Cells

Download Full-text

Periosteal Envelope Flap as a Technique for Horizontal Bone Augmentation: A Case Series Study

The Open Dentistry Journal ◽

10.2174/1874210601812010995 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 12 (1) ◽

pp. 995-1003

Author(s):

Sepideh Arab ◽

Hamid Reza Arab ◽

Maryam Aghaloo ◽

Farid Shiezadeh ◽

Shamim Tajik ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Bone Regeneration ◽

Tooth Extraction ◽

Alveolar Bone ◽

Case Series ◽

Bone Width ◽

Clinical Investigations ◽

Horizontal Length ◽

Case Series Study ◽

Excellent Method ◽

Ridge Width

Background: Following tooth extraction, the alveolar bone is typically subject to irrevocable and progressive changes that are collectively referred to as natural bone resorption. This process eventually results in a deficiency of the vertical and horizontal dimensions of the bone. Conventionally, various methods are used to repair alveolar defects resulting from tooth extraction, and to achieve vertical or horizontal bone regeneration. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of periosteal pocket flap on the enhancement of horizontal length in alveolar bone regeneration. Methods: Twenty-two patients (7 men, 15 women) aged 45–60 years were enrolled in this study. Periosteal envelope flaps and Cerabone were used to increase alveolar bone thickness. Ridge width was measured preoperatively and 4-6 months postoperatively using cone-beam computed tomography. The pre- and postoperative results were compared using the paired t-test. Results: An average of 2.53 mm (P < 0.001) horizontal enhancement of the alveolar ridge was achieved. Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that the use of a periosteal pocket flap with xenograft material is an excellent method which increase more than 2 mm alveolar bone width. As the study sample was small, further clinical investigations with larger samples are recommended.

Download Full-text

The potential of mangosteen (Garcinia mangostana) peel extract, combined with demineralized freeze-dried bovine bone xenograft, to reduce ridge resorption and alveolar bone regeneration in preserving the tooth extraction socket

The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society ◽

10.4103/jips.jips_64_17 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 17 (3) ◽

pp. 282 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Utari Kresnoadi ◽

MaretaningtiasDwi Ariani ◽

Eha Djulaeha ◽

Nike Hendrijantini

Keyword(s):

Bone Regeneration ◽

Tooth Extraction ◽

Alveolar Bone ◽

Bovine Bone ◽

Garcinia Mangostana ◽

Extraction Socket ◽

Freeze Dried ◽

Peel Extract

Download Full-text

Interim Endodontic Therapy for Alveolar Socket Bone Regeneration of Infected Hopeless Teeth Prior to Implant Therapy

Journal of Oral Implantology ◽

10.1563/aaid-joi-d-09-00040 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 36 (1) ◽

pp. 37-59 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Marwan Abou Rass

Keyword(s):

Bone Regeneration ◽

Maxillary Sinus ◽

Tooth Extraction ◽

Alveolar Bone ◽

Bone Defects ◽

Endodontic Treatment ◽

Sinus Surgery ◽

Implant Placement ◽

Immediate Implant ◽

Delayed Implant Placement

Abstract The immediate placement of implants in the fresh extraction sockets of infected teeth with periradicular and periapical lesions is contraindicated because of both the infection and the loss of architecture required for proper implant placement. There are 4 approaches for implant replacement of a hopeless tooth with lesions: (1) extraction and delayed implant placement; (2) extraction, debridement, guided bone regeneration (GBR), guided tissue regeneration (GTR), and delayed implant placement; (3) extraction, intrasocket debridement, and immediate implant placement; or (4) extraction, debridement, GBR, GTR, and simultaneous implant placement. The extraction of such hopeless teeth often results in large bone and soft tissue defects that are difficult to repair. This article introduces an alternative approach: interim endodontic implant site preparation, defined as a transitional, surgical, or nonsurgical endodontic treatment to regenerate the hopeless tooth bone defects and prepare the site for proper implant placement. This article describes 3 distinct interim endodontic protocols used to manage 5 patients, all of whom had severely infected hopeless teeth with large lesions and were treatment planned for implant replacement: the first, interim nonsurgical endodontic treatment to restore the normal anatomy of the infected hopeless tooth; the second, interim surgical endodontics on the hopeless tooth with preexisting endodontic treatment to regenerate apical bone for primary implant stability, thus avoiding the involvement of the maxillary sinus and other critical anatomic structures; and the third, interim surgical endodontics on the hopeless tooth with preexisting endodontic treatment to confine the size of the osseous defect and simplify the GBR and GTR procedures. The outcome of interim endodontic treatment on these 5 patients demonstrated that tooth extraction would have been a less predictable approach. The interim treatment changed the overall direction of the patients' dental care. When treated, these hopeless teeth served many preventive, biologic, and esthetic functions. The infections of the alveolar sockets were eliminated, the alveolar bone defects were repaired through normal bone regeneration, and sockets anatomies were maintained or restored. Furthermore, the patients were spared maxillary sinus surgery and the possible complications resulting from major GBR and GTR procedures. In summary, the interim treatment facilitated tooth extraction and immediate implant placement.

Download Full-text