Literature DB >> 19792851

Dental implants placed in extraction sites grafted with different bone substitutes: radiographic evaluation at 24 months.

Roberto Crespi1, Paolo Capparè, Enrico Gherlone.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Reduction of alveolar height and width after tooth extraction may provide some problems in implant placement, especially in the anterior maxilla for esthetic reasons. Different graft materials have been advocated to prevent bone-volume reduction. The aim of this study was to evaluate radiographic parameters of implants positioned in grafted alveoli with three different biomaterials: magnesium-enriched hydroxyapatite (MHA), calcium sulfate (CS), and heterologous porcine bone (PB).
METHODS: In 15 patients, 45 fresh extraction sockets with three bone walls were selected. Fifteen sockets received MHA, 15 sockets received CS, and 15 sockets received corticocancellous PB as a graft material. Three months after bone filling, titanium dental implants were placed in grafted sites. Three months after implant placement, temporary restoration was performed. Follow-up examinations were conducted, and intraoral digital radiographs were taken at baseline and 12 and 24 months after implant placement to evaluate the marginal bone level in each patient. Comparisons for marginal bone loss over time between groups were performed by the Student two-tailed t test.
RESULTS: At the 24-month follow-up, a survival rate of 100% was reported for all implants. For the MHA group, a mean mesial bone loss of -0.21 +/- 0.08 mm and a mean distal bone loss of -0.22 +/- 0.09 mm (mean bone loss: 0.21 +/- 0.09 mm) were reported; for the CS group, a mesial bone loss of -0.14 +/- 0.07 mm and a distal bone loss of -0.12 +/- 0.11 mm (mean bone loss: -0.13 +/- 0.09 mm) were measured; for the PB group, a mean mesial bone loss of -0.15 +/- 0.10 mm and a mean distal bone loss of -0.16 +/- 0.06 mm (mean bone loss: -0.16 +/- 0.08 mm) were reported. No statistically significant differences were reported among groups (P >0.05).
CONCLUSION: At the 24-month follow-up, the present study showed that placement of implants in grafted sockets was not influenced by the three different biomaterials because they did not negatively impact the clinical outcome.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19792851     DOI: 10.1902/jop.2009.090156

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


  8 in total

1.  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

2.  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

3.  Single-tooth morse taper connection implant placed in grafted site of the anterior maxilla: clinical and radiographic evaluation.

Authors:  Francesco Guido Mangano; Piero Zecca; Fabrizia Luongo; Giovanna Iezzi; Carlo Mangano
Journal:  Case Rep Dent       Date:  2014-11-05

4.  Peri-Implant Bone Loss at Implants Placed in Preserved Alveolar Bone Versus Implants Placed in Native Bone: A Retrospective Radiographic Study.

Authors:  Johann Bui Quoc; Aurélie Vang; Laurence Evrard
Journal:  Open Dent J       Date:  2018-07-31

Review 5.  A Narrative Review on the Effectiveness of Bone Regeneration Procedures with OsteoBiol® Collagenated Porcine Grafts: The Translational Research Experience over 20 Years.

Authors:  Tea Romasco; Margherita Tumedei; Francesco Inchingolo; Pamela Pignatelli; Lorenzo Montesani; Giovanna Iezzi; Morena Petrini; Adriano Piattelli; Natalia Di Pietro
Journal:  J Funct Biomater       Date:  2022-08-18

6.  Alveolar ridge preservation with guided bone regeneration or socket seal technique. A randomised, single-blind controlled clinical trial.

Authors:  Neil D MacBeth; Nikolaos Donos; Nikos Mardas
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2022-06-22       Impact factor: 5.021

7.  Porcine Bone Scaffolds Adsorb Growth Factors Secreted by MSCs and Improve Bone Tissue Repair.

Authors:  Eitan Mijiritsky; Letizia Ferroni; Chiara Gardin; Eriberto Bressan; Gastone Zanette; Adriano Piattelli; Barbara Zavan
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2017-09-08       Impact factor: 3.623

8.  Effect of Nanostructured Scaffold on Human Adipose-Derived Stem Cells: Outcome of In Vitro Experiments.

Authors:  Marina Borgese; Ludovica Barone; Federica Rossi; Mario Raspanti; Roberto Papait; Luigi Valdatta; Giovanni Bernardini; Rosalba Gornati
Journal:  Nanomaterials (Basel)       Date:  2020-09-12       Impact factor: 5.076

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.