Literature DB >> 19186960

Magnesium-enriched hydroxyapatite compared to calcium sulfate in the healing of human extraction sockets: radiographic and histomorphometric evaluation at 3 months.

Roberto Crespi1, Paolo Capparè, Enrico Gherlone.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Reduction of alveolar height and width after tooth extraction may present problems for implant placement, especially in the anterior maxilla where bone volume is important for biologic and esthetic reasons. Different graft materials have been proposed to minimize the reduction in ridge volume. The aim of this study was to compare radiographic and histomorphometric results of magnesium-enriched hydroxyapatite (MHA) and calcium sulfate (CS) grafts in fresh sockets after tooth extractions.
METHODS: Forty-five fresh extraction sockets with three bone walls were selected in 15 patients. A split-mouth design was used: 15 sockets on the right side of the jaw received MHA, 15 sockets on the left side received CS, and 15 random unfilled sockets were considered the control (C) group. Intraoral digital radiographs were taken at baseline and at 3 months after graft material placement. At 3 months, cylinder bone samples were obtained for histology and histomorphometry analysis.
RESULTS: The difference in mean radiographic vertical bone level from baseline to 3 months was -2.48 +/- 0.65 mm in the CS group, -0.48 +/- 0.21 mm in the MHA group, and -3.75 +/- 0.63 mm in the unfilled C group. Statistically significant differences (P <0.05) were found between CS and MHA groups and between MHA and C groups. Histologic examination revealed bone formation in all treated sites; trabecular bone assessment did not differ among apical, mesial, and coronal portions of the specimens. Mean vital bone measurements for CS, MHA, and C groups were 45.0% +/- 6.5%, 40.0% +/- 2.7%, and 32.8% +/- 5.8%, respectively. Statistically significant differences (P <0.05) were found among all groups. Connective tissue percentages averaged 41.5% +/- 6.7% for the CS group, 41.3% +/- 1.3% for the MHA group, and 64.6% +/- 6.8% for the C group. Statistically significant differences (P <0.05) were found between CS and C groups and between MHA and C groups. The CS-grafted sockets showed 13.9% +/- 3.4% residual implant material, whereas the MHA-treated sockets showed 20.2% +/- 3.2% residual material. The difference between the groups was statistically significant (P <0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Radiographs revealed a greater reduction of alveolar ridge in the CS group than in the MHA group. Histologic examination showed more bone formation and faster resorption in the CS group and more residual implant material in the MHA group.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19186960     DOI: 10.1902/jop.2009.080400

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Periodontol        ISSN: 0022-3492            Impact factor:   6.993


  16 in total

1.  Alveolar bone healing process in spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR). A radiographic densitometry study.

Authors:  Natalia Manrique; Cassiano Costa Silva Pereira; Lourdes Maria Gonzáles Garcia; Samuel Micaroni; Antonio Augusto Ferreira de Carvalho; Sílvia Helena Venturoli Perri; Roberta Okamoto; Doris Hissako Sumida; Cristina Antoniali
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2012 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.698

Review 2.  Effect of alveolar ridge preservation after tooth extraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  G Avila-Ortiz; S Elangovan; K W O Kramer; D Blanchette; D V Dawson
Journal:  J Dent Res       Date:  2014-06-25       Impact factor: 6.116

3.  Long-term in vivo experimental investigations on magnesium doped hydroxyapatite bone substitutes.

Authors:  M Sartori; G Giavaresi; M Tschon; L Martini; L Dolcini; M Fiorini; D Pressato; M Fini
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2014-02-20       Impact factor: 3.896

4.  Magnesium-enriched hydroxyapatite as bone filler in an ameloblastoma mandibular defect.

Authors:  Roberto Grigolato; Natalia Pizzi; Maria C Brotto; Giovanni Corrocher; Giovanna Desando; Brunella Grigolo
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-01-15

5.  Dimensional changes following alveolar ridge preservation in the posterior area using bovine-derived xenografts and collagen membrane compared to spontaneous healing: a 6-month randomized controlled clinical trial.

Authors:  Vincenzo Iorio-Siciliano; Luca Ramaglia; Andrea Blasi; Paolo Bucci; Paolo Nuzzolo; Francesco Riccitiello; Michele Nicolò
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2019-07-08       Impact factor: 3.573

Review 6.  Interventions for replacing missing teeth: alveolar ridge preservation techniques for dental implant site development.

Authors:  Momen A Atieh; Nabeel H M Alsabeeha; Alan G T Payne; Warwick Duncan; Clovis M Faggion; Marco Esposito
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-05-28

7.  Histological evaluation of a biomimetic material in bone regeneration after one year from graft.

Authors:  Michele M Figliuzzi; Rossella De Fazio; Rosamaria Tiano; Serena De Franceschi; Delfina Pacifico; Francesco Mangano; Leonzio Fortunato
Journal:  Ann Stomatol (Roma)       Date:  2014-11-20

8.  To assess the efficacy of socket plug technique using platelet rich fibrin with or without the use of bone substitute in alveolar ridge preservation: a prospective randomised controlled study.

Authors:  N Girish Kumar; Rupanzal Chaudhary; Ish Kumar; Srimathy S Arora; Nilesh Kumar; Hem Singh
Journal:  Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2018-02-06

9.  Bone formation with two types of grafting materials: a histologic and histomorphometric study.

Authors:  Amir Reza Rokn; Mohammad Amin Khodadoostan; Amir Ali Reza Rasouli Ghahroudi; Puria Motahhary; Mohammad Javad Kharrazi Fard; Hugo De Bruyn; Rose Afzalifar; Ehsan Soolar; Ahmad Soolari
Journal:  Open Dent J       Date:  2011-07-07

10.  Interventions for replacing missing teeth: alveolar ridge preservation techniques for dental implant site development.

Authors:  Momen A Atieh; Nabeel Hm Alsabeeha; Alan Gt Payne; Sara Ali; Clovis M Jr Faggion; Marco Esposito
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-04-26
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.