| Literature DB >> 26815224 |
Lu Feng1, Liang Zhang2, Yun Cui3, Tian-Xi Song3, Zhi-Ye Qiu4, Xiu-Mei Wang5, Bao-Sheng Tan6.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to explore the different effects between biomimetic mineralized collagen (MC) and ordinary physically blended hydroxyapatite/collagen (HA/Col) composite in evaluating new bone formation and regenerated bone height in human extraction sockets. Thirty-four patients who cannot retain teeth caused by trauma or decay were randomly selected from Department of Stomatology of Dongzhimen Hospital from December 2013 to December 2014. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. After the operation of tooth extraction, 17 patients were implanted with biomimetic MC (MC group), and other 17 patients were implanted with ordinary physically blended nHA/Col composite (nHA/Col group). X-ray positioning projection by auto-photographing was taken to test the distance between the lowest position and the neighboring CEJm-CEJd immediately, 1 month and 3 months after the operation. The height of new bone formation of the MC group was significantly higher than the nHA/Col group. Biomimetic MC showed better clinical outcomes in the bone formation for extraction site preservation and would have broad application prospect in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgeries.Entities:
Keywords: biomimetic; bone formation height; extraction site preservation; mineralized collagen
Year: 2016 PMID: 26815224 PMCID: PMC4723274 DOI: 10.1093/rb/rbv027
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Regen Biomater ISSN: 2056-3426
Figure 1.(a) Scanning electron microscope (SEM) images of MC. (b) The morphology of MC
Figure 2.The measurement method of test and the distance between the lowest position and the neighboring CEJm-CEJd after operation
Accomplished cases of the two types of materials at different sites and different sexes
| Tooth position | Type A | Type B | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M | F | M | F | ||
| Front teeth | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
| Molar | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
| Premolar | 3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 10 |
The distance between the lowest position and the neighboring CEJm-CEJd of the two types of materials at different times (cm)
| Object of observation (implantation site) | A | B | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 M | 3M | Height differences | 1M | 3M | Height differences | |
| 1 | 1.51 | 1.35 | 0.16 | 2.36 | 2.73 | −0.37 |
| 2 | 0.62 | 0.34 | 0.28 | 1.76 | 1.70 | 0.06 |
| 3 | 1.81 | 1.73 | 0.08 | 2.25 | 2.54 | −0.29 |
| 4 | 1.93 | 1.08 | 0.85 | 2.59 | 2.68 | −0.09 |
| 5 | 1.93 | 0.62 | 1.31 | 1.86 | 2.23 | −0.37 |
| 6 | 0.57 | 0.61 | −0.04 | 2.07 | 2.32 | −0.25 |
| 7 | 2.16 | 2.00 | 0.16 | 2.39 | 2.45 | −0.06 |
| 8 | 3.00 | 2.97 | 0.03 | 1.96 | 2.02 | −0.06 |
| 9 | 0.98 | 0.32 | 0.66 | 2.98 | 2.72 | 0.26 |
| 10 | 1.00 | 0.81 | 0.19 | 1.75 | 1.53 | 0.22 |
| 11 | 1.56 | 1.02 | 0.54 | 2.38 | 2.65 | −0.27 |
| 12 | 1.35 | 1.25 | 0.1 | 1.55 | 1.82 | −0.27 |
| 13 | 0.69 | 0.45 | 0.24 | 1.07 | 1.55 | −0.48 |
| 14 | 1.68 | 1.35 | 0.33 | 1.05 | 1.54 | −0.49 |
| 15 | 1.87 | 1.54 | 0.33 | 1.37 | 1.81 | −0.44 |
| 16 | 2.00 | 1.88 | 0.12 | 1.87 | 1.94 | −0.07 |
| 17 | 1.69 | 1.46 | 0.23 | 2.16 | 2.62 | −0.46 |
| 0.33 ± 0.12 | −0.20 ± 0.05 | |||||
The contrasting results of the bone formation height of the two types of materials
| Effect | Num DF | Den DF | F Value | Pr > F |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Type | 1 | 31 | 15.62 | 0.0004 |
| Time | 1 | 31 | 0.26 | 0.6171 |
| Type*time | 1 | 31 | 34.01 | <.0001 |
Figure 3.The X ray film of two typical cases implanted with MC and HA/col material. A(0): immediately after surgery; A(3) and B(5): implanted with MC material 3 months and 5 months after surgery; a(DI): dental implants after implanted with MC material 5 months; B(0): immediately after surgery; B(3): implanted with HA/col material 3 months after surgery
Figure 4.Spiral CT three-dimensional reconstruction and measurement of the height and width of new bone formation for one case implanted with MC immediately and 3 months after surgery. (A) Three-dimensional reconstruction immediately after surgery. (B) Three-dimensional localization both horizontally and vertically. (C and D) The depth and width of teeth extraction socket immediately after surgery. (E and F) The depth and width of teeth extraction socket 3 months after surgery
The comparison of the morphological change of the teeth extraction sockets with time
| Groups | 1M change | 1M no change | 3M change | 3M no change |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 8 | 9 | 15 | 2 |
| B | 5 | 12 | 14 | 3 |
| Total | 13 | 21 | 29 | 5 |
The contrasting results of the time of morphological change of the teeth extraction sockets
| Statistic | Degree of freedom | Value | Probability |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chi-square | 1 | 0.9089 | 0.3404 |
| Likelihood ratio chi-square | 1 | 0.9148 | 0.3389 |
| Continuous correction chi-square | 1 | 0.3361 | 0.5621 |
| Mantel–Haenszel chi-square | 1 | 0.8776 | 0.3489 |
| Phi coefficient | 0.1770 | ||
| Coefficient of association | 0.1743 | ||
| Cramer's | 0.1770 |
The height differences in 1–3 months between the lowest position and the neighboring CEJm-CEJd after the two types of materials implanted in different sites, different sexes and different times (cm)
| Type | Cases | Male | Cases | Female | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Height differences | Height differences | ||||
| Front teeth | A | 3 | 0.23 ± 0.017 | 3 | 0.71 ± 0.47 |
| B | 3 | −0.2 ± 0.052 | 3 | −0.24 ± 0.019 | |
| Molar | A | 3 | 0.28 ± 0.11 | 3 | 0.28 ± 0.054 |
| B | 3 | 0.047 ± 0.034 | 3 | −0.11 ± 0.080 | |
| Premola | A | 3 | 0.24 ± 0.0072 | 2 | 0.18 ± 0.0061 |
| B | 3 | −0.47 ± 0.0007 | 2 | −0.27 ± 0.076 |
The main effects and interactions of the repeated measure data of time variable
| Source | Type III sum of squares | DF | Mean square | Sig | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time | 0.051 | 1 | 0.051 | 0.763 | 0.392 |
| Time*type | 1.672 | 1 | 1.672 | 24.877 | 0.000 |
| Time*sex | 0.055 | 1 | 0.055 | 0.825 | 0.373 |
| Time*position | 0.032 | 2 | 0.016 | 0.240 | 0.788 |
| Time*type*sex | 0.29 | 1 | 0.029 | 0.429 | 0.519 |
| Time*type*position | 0.186 | 2 | 0.093 | 1.382 | 0.272 |
| Time*sex*position | 0.300 | 2 | 0.150 | 2.235 | 0.131 |
| Time*type*sex*position | 0.082 | 2 | 0.041 | 0.613 | 0.551 |
| Error (time) | 1.479 | 22 | 0.067 |
The main effects and interactions of the other grouping factors
| Source | Type III sum of squares | DF | Mean square | Sig | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 193.394 | 1 | 193.394 | 342.695 | <.0001 |
| Type | 8.667 | 1 | 8.667 | 15.357 | 0.001 |
| Sex | 0.001 | 1 | 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.964 |
| Position | 0.823 | 2 | 0.411 | 0.729 | 0.494 |
| Type*sex | 0.095 | 1 | 0.095 | 0.168 | 0.686 |
| Type*position | 2.004 | 2 | 1.002 | 1.776 | 0.193 |
| Sex*position | 4.491 | 2 | 2.246 | 3.979 | 0.033 |
| Type*sex*position | 0.018 | 2 | 0.009 | 0.016 | 0.984 |
| Error | 12.415 | 22 | 0.564 |