OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to volumetrically assess alterations of the ridge contour after socket preservation and buccal overbuilding. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In five beagle dogs, four extraction sites were subjected to one of the following treatments: Tx 1: The socket was filled with BioOss Collagen and covered with a free gingival autograft from the palate (SP). Tx 2: The buccal bone plate was forced into a buccal direction using a manual bone spreader and SP was performed. Tx 3: The buccal bone plate was forced into a buccal direction using a manual bone spreader; SP was performed. Tx 4: The socket was filled with BioOss Collagen and a combined free gingival/connective tissue graft was used to cover the socket and for buccal tissue augmentation. Impressions were obtained at baseline, 2 weeks and 4 months post-operatively. Casts were optically scanned and superimposed in one common coordinate system. Using digital image analysis, the volumetric differences per area among the different treatment time points and among the treatment groups were calculated. RESULTS: Four months after tooth extraction, no statistically significant differences with regard to the buccal volume per area could be assessed among the treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Overbuilding the buccal aspect in combination with socket preservation is not a suitable technique to compensate for the alterations after tooth extraction.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to volumetrically assess alterations of the ridge contour after socket preservation and buccal overbuilding. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In five beagle dogs, four extraction sites were subjected to one of the following treatments: Tx 1: The socket was filled with BioOss Collagen and covered with a free gingival autograft from the palate (SP). Tx 2: The buccal bone plate was forced into a buccal direction using a manual bone spreader and SP was performed. Tx 3: The buccal bone plate was forced into a buccal direction using a manual bone spreader; SP was performed. Tx 4: The socket was filled with BioOss Collagen and a combined free gingival/connective tissue graft was used to cover the socket and for buccal tissue augmentation. Impressions were obtained at baseline, 2 weeks and 4 months post-operatively. Casts were optically scanned and superimposed in one common coordinate system. Using digital image analysis, the volumetric differences per area among the different treatment time points and among the treatment groups were calculated. RESULTS: Four months after tooth extraction, no statistically significant differences with regard to the buccal volume per area could be assessed among the treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Overbuilding the buccal aspect in combination with socket preservation is not a suitable technique to compensate for the alterations after tooth extraction.
Authors: I Sanz-Martin; L Ferrantino; F Vignoletti; J Nuñez; N Baldini; M Duvina; J Alcaraz; M Sanz Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2017-10-03 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Joana Gomes Dos Santos; Ana Paula Oliveira Reis Durão; António Cabral de Campos Felino; Ricardo Manuel Casaleiro Lobo de Faria de Almeida Journal: J Oral Maxillofac Res Date: 2019-06-30