Hyun-Chun Park1, Su-Gwan Kim, Ji-Su Oh, Jae-Seek You, Jae-Sung Kim, Sung-Chul Lim, Mi-Ae Jeong, Jin-Son Kim, Chan Jung, Young-Sun Kwon, Hyeok Ji. 1. *Resident, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Chosun University, Gwangju, Republic of Korea. †Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Chosun University, Gwangju, Republic of Korea. ‡Associate Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Chosun University, Gwangju, Republic of Korea. §Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Chosun University, Gwangju, Republic of Korea. ¶Assistant Professor, Department of Pre-Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Chosun University, Gwangju, Republic of Korea. ‖Professor, Department of Pathology, School of Medicine, Chosun University, Gwangju, Republic of Korea. #Professor, Department of Dental Hygiene, Kangwon National University, Samcheok, Republic of Korea. ††Clinical doctor, Misomore Dental Clinic, Jeonju, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the predictability of new bone formation using an autologous concentrated growth factor (CGF) graft alone and platelet graft alone. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four bony defects of 8 mm were formed, and 3.7- × 10-mm implants were placed in the right femur. The platelet-rich fibrin (PRF), CGF, and synthetic bone were grafted to the bone defect area. Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay quantitative analysis and microscopic analysis of the fibrinogen structure were performed. RESULTS: At 4 weeks, the comparisons of each experimental group showed a significant difference between the CGF group and the synthetic bone graft group. When comparing the CGF and allograft material groups, the allograft group showed significantly more new bone formation. In the case of vascular endothelial growth factor, CGF had 1.5 times more than PRF. CGF showed a fibrinogen structure with a constant diameter. CONCLUSION: When applied to a clinical case, CGF is predicted to show better results than PRF.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the predictability of new bone formation using an autologous concentrated growth factor (CGF) graft alone and platelet graft alone. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four bony defects of 8 mm were formed, and 3.7- × 10-mm implants were placed in the right femur. The platelet-rich fibrin (PRF), CGF, and synthetic bone were grafted to the bone defect area. Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay quantitative analysis and microscopic analysis of the fibrinogen structure were performed. RESULTS: At 4 weeks, the comparisons of each experimental group showed a significant difference between the CGF group and the synthetic bone graft group. When comparing the CGF and allograft material groups, the allograft group showed significantly more new bone formation. In the case of vascular endothelial growth factor, CGF had 1.5 times more than PRF. CGF showed a fibrinogen structure with a constant diameter. CONCLUSION: When applied to a clinical case, CGF is predicted to show better results than PRF.