scholarly journals Clinical applications of concentrated growth factors combined with bone substitutes for alveolar ridge preservation in maxillary molar area: a randomized controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shi-chen Lin ◽  
Xin Li ◽  
Hang Liu ◽  
Fang Wu ◽  
Lian Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Growth Factors ◽  
Bone Substitutes ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Ridge Preservation ◽  
Bovine Bone ◽  
Alveolar Ridge ◽  
Alveolar Ridge Preservation ◽  
Ridge Area ◽  
Maxillary Molar ◽  
Concentrated Growth Factors

Abstract Purpose To evaluate the clinical effects of concentrated growth factors (CGFs) combined with bone substitutes for alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) in the maxillary molar area. Methods Thirty-six patients who underwent extraction of the upper molars were recruited and randomly divided into three groups: 1. Grafted with CGFs combined with deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) and covered with CGFs membrane (CGFs/DBBM group), 2. Grafted with DBBM alone and covered with collagen membrane (DBBM group), 3. Control group spontaneous healing. The area of the alveolar bone in center (C-), mesial (M-) and distal (D-) section was compared with preoperative in radiography. Bone cores were obtained for histopathology observation and comparison. Results In C-, M- and D-section, the alveolar ridge area in all three groups was significantly reduced at 8 months postoperatively compared to the baseline (P < 0.05). The alveolar ridge area declines in the CGFs/DBBM group (C-12.75 ± 2.22 mm2, M-14.69 ± 2.82 mm2, D-16.95 ± 4.17 mm2) and DBBM group (C-14.08 ± 2.51 mm2, M-15.42 ± 3.47 mm2, D-16.09 ± 3.97 mm2) were non-significant differences. They were significantly less than the decline in the control group (C-45.04 ± 8.38 mm2 M-31.98 ± 8.34 mm2, D-31.85 ± 8.52 mm2) (P < 0.05). The percentage of newly formed bone in the CGFs/DBBM group (41.99 ± 12.99%) was significantly greater than that in DBBM group (30.68 ± 10.95%) (P < 0.05). The percentage of residual materials in the CGFs/DBBM group (16.19 ± 6.63%) was significantly less than that in the DBBM group (28.35 ± 11.70%) (P < 0.05). Conclusion Combined application of CGFs and DBBM effectively reduced the resorption of alveolar ridge and resulted in more newly formed bone than the use of DBBM with collagen membranes.

scholarly journals Clinical application of concentrate growth factors combined with bone substitute in Alveolar ridge preservation of anterior teeth

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dilinuer Keranmu ◽  
Nijiati Nuermuhanmode ◽  
Ailimaierdan Ainiwaer ◽  
Adili Moming ◽  
Gu Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Growth Factors ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Gingival Tissue ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Ridge Preservation ◽  
Alveolar Ridge ◽  
Anterior Teeth ◽  
Alveolar Ridge Preservation ◽  
Bone Powder ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Objective: To investigate the clinical effect of concentrated growth factors (CGF) combined with Bio-oss bone powder on Alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) during implantology. Methods: A total of 38 patients were selected and randomly divided into 2 groups, with 19 cases in each group. The extraction sockets were filled with Bio-oss bone powder with or without CGF. VAS pain score was recorded within1 week and Landry wound healing index (LWHI) was recorded at 1, 2 and 3 weeks after operation. CBCT was taken 3 and 6 months after operation to measure and compare the changes of vertical height, width and gray value of alveolar bone at extraction site. The changes of alveolar bone contour were observed clinically and compared between the two groups. Results: The VAS score of CGF group was lower than control group on the 1st and 3rd day after operation (P < 0.05). The LWHI of CGF group was higher than control group 1 week after operation (P < 0.05). The absorption of the labial and palatal plates height and the width in the CGF group was significantly less than the control group at 3 months (P<0.05). The gray value of alveolar bone in CGF group was significantly higher than control group at 3 months (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in new bone contour between the two groups (P > 0.05). 94.7% cases in CGF group did not undergo bone grafting, which was significantly higher than control group (78.9%). Conclusions: The use of CGF combined with Bio-oss bone powder can help to reduce postoperative pain at the early stage of healing, form sufficient keratinized gingival tissue, effectively maintain the height and width of alveolar bone in the three-dimensional direction and provide good conditions for implant repair in the future.

Efficacy of Alveolar Ridge Preservation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 99 (4) ◽  
pp. 402-409 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Avila-Ortiz ◽  
M. Gubler ◽  
M. Romero-Bustillos ◽  
C.L. Nicholas ◽  
M.B. Zimmerman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tooth Extraction ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Ridge Preservation ◽  
Alveolar Ridge ◽  
Bone Augmentation ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Alveolar Ridge Preservation

Alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) therapy is indicated to attenuate the physiologic resorptive events that occur as a consequence of tooth extraction with the purpose of facilitating tooth replacement therapy. This randomized controlled trial was primarily aimed at testing the efficacy of ARP as compared with unassisted socket healing. A secondary objective was to evaluate the effect that local phenotypic factors play in the volumetric reduction of the alveolar bone. A total of 53 subjects completed the study. Subjects were randomized into either the control group, which involved only tooth extraction (EXT n = 27), or the experimental group, which received ARP using a combination of socket grafting with a particulate bone allograft and socket sealing with a nonabsorbable membrane (dPTFE) following tooth extraction (ARP n = 26). A set of clinical, linear, volumetric, implant-related, and patient-reported outcomes were assessed during a 14-wk healing period. All linear bone assessments (horizontal, midbuccal, and midlingual reduction) revealed that ARP is superior to EXT. Likewise, volumetric bone resorption was significantly higher in the control group (mean ± SD: EXT = −15.83% ± 4.48%, ARP = −8.36% ± 3.81%, P < 0.0001). Linear regression analyses revealed that baseline buccal bone thickness is a strong predictor of alveolar bone resorption in both groups. Interestingly, no significant differences in terms of soft tissue contour change were observed between groups. Additional bone augmentation to facilitate implant placement in a prosthetically acceptable position was deemed necessary in 48.1% of the EXT sites and only 11.5% of the ARP sites ( P < 0.004). Assessment of perceived postoperative discomfort at each follow-up visit revealed a progressive decrease over time, which was comparable between groups. Although some extent of alveolar ridge remodeling occurred in both groups, ARP therapy was superior to EXT as it was more efficacious in the maintenance of alveolar bone and reduced the estimated need for additional bone augmentation at the time of implant placement (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01794806).

scholarly journals Efficacy of Alveolar Ridge Preservation after Maxillary Molar Extraction in Reducing Crestal Bone Resorption and Sinus Pneumatization: A Multicenter Prospective Case-Control Study

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Teresa Lombardi ◽  
Fabio Bernardello ◽  
Federico Berton ◽  
Davide Porrelli ◽  
Antonio Rapani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Resorption ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Test Group ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Ridge Preservation ◽  
Alveolar Ridge Preservation ◽  
Maxillary Molar ◽  
Socket Healing ◽  
Maxillary Molar Extraction ◽  
Molar Extraction

Aim. To evaluate, with three-dimensional analysis, the effectiveness of alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) after maxillary molar extraction in reducing alveolar bone resorption and maxillary sinus pneumatization when compared to unassisted socket healing. Methods. Patients were included in the study following inclusion criteria and underwent minimally traumatic maxillary molar extraction followed by ARP using synthetic nanohydroxyapatite (Fisiograft Bone, Ghimas, Italy) (test group) or unassisted socket healing (control group). Cone-beam computerized tomographies (CBCT) were performed immediately after tooth extraction (T0) and 6 months postoperatively (T1). CBCTs were superimposed by using a specific software (Amira, Thermo Fisher Scientific, USA) and the following items were analyzed in both groups: (i) postextractive maxillary sinus floor expansion in coronal direction and (ii) postextractive alveolar bone dimensional changes (both vertical and horizontal). All data were tested for normality and equality of variance and subsequently analyzed by independent samples T-test and Mann–Whitney test. Results. Thirty patients were treated by three centers and twenty-six (test n=13; control n=13) were included in the final analysis. Mean sinus pneumatization at T1 was 0.69±0.48 mm in the test group and 1.04±0.67 mm in the control group (p=0.15). Mean vertical reduction of the alveolar bone at T1 was 1.62±0.49 mm in the test group and 2.01±0.84 mm in the control group (p=0.08). Mean horizontal resorption of crestal bone at T1 was 2.73±1.68 mm in test group and 3.63±2.24 mm in control group (p=0.24). Conclusions. It could be suggested that ARP performed after maxillary molar extraction may reduce the entity of sinus pneumatization and alveolar bone resorption, compared to unassisted socket healing. This technique could decrease the necessity of advanced regenerative procedures prior to dental implant placement in posterior maxilla.

Alveolar Ridge Preservation With Deproteinized Bovine Bone Graft and Collagen Membrane and Delayed Implants

2014 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 1698-1702 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chaoyuan Pang ◽  
Yuxiang Ding ◽  
Hongzhi Zhou ◽  
Ruifeng Qin ◽  
Rui Hou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Graft ◽  
Collagen Membrane ◽  
Ridge Preservation ◽  
Bovine Bone ◽  
Alveolar Ridge ◽  
Alveolar Ridge Preservation ◽  
Deproteinized Bovine Bone

Alveolar Ridge Preservation Using Allografts and Dense Polytetrafluoroethylene Membranes With Open Membrane Technique in Unhealthy Extraction Socket

2017 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 267-273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gi-Beom Cheon ◽  
Kyung Lhi Kang ◽  
Mi-Kyung Yoo ◽  
Jeoung-A Yu ◽  
Dong-Woon Lee
Keyword(s):  
Fibrous Tissue ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Ridge Preservation ◽  
Alveolar Ridge ◽  
Alveolar Ridge Preservation ◽  
Membrane Technique ◽  
Freeze Dried ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Open Membrane

We evaluated the effectiveness of the open membrane technique using a high-density polytetrafluoroethylene (dPTFE) membrane with freeze-dried bone allografts in damaged sockets for alveolar ridge preservation (ARP). This retrospective study included 26 sites from 20 patients who had received ARP for the placement of dental implants. ARP was conducted using dPTFE membrane with allografts on the day of extraction without primary closure. When the membrane was removed after 4 weeks, the newly formed reddish tissue at the grafted site was checked (first outcome, clinical evaluation). Four months after membrane removal, a core biopsy was performed from the center of the grafted site before implant placement (second outcome, histomorphometric evaluation). Radiographic measurements of alveolar bone changes between implant prosthesis delivery and the 1-year follow-up were obtained (third outcome, radiographic evaluation). A total of 23 sites from 18 patients had no complications during the follow-up period. Three sites from two patients were excluded because of early membrane removal. Newly formed reddish tissue was found at 15 sites, and partially formed tissue was found at 8 sites. Although we were unable to harvest bone core from all sites, histomorphometric analysis in 11 patients indicated that the mean area of new bone was 28.48% ± 6.60%, that of the remaining graft particle was 27.68% ± 9.18%, and that of fibrous tissue was 43.84% ± 6.98%. The mean loss of marginal bone was 0.13 ± 0.06 mm at the mesial area and 0.15 ± 0.06 mm at the distal area, as assessed using radiographic evaluations. The results of this nonrandomized study suggest that this technique may be an appropriate procedure for ARP. Further studies with a control group and more subjectives can be designed based on this study.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document