Miguel Noronha Oliveira1, Levy Hermes Rau2, Aline Marodin3, Márcio Corrêa4, Letícia Ruhland Corrêa5, Aguedo Aragones6, Ricardo de Souza Magini7. 1. PhD Student, Post-graduate Program in Dentistry (PPGO), Center for Research and Education on Dental Implants (CEPID), School of Dentistry (ODT), Federal University of Santa Catarina, UFSC, Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brazil. 2. Program Director, Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Joana de Gusmão Children Hospital, Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brazil. 3. Chief Resident, Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Joana de Gusmão Children Hospital, Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brazil. 4. Associate Professor of the Graduation Program in Dentistry, Federal University of Santa Catarina, UFSC, Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brazil. 5. Private Practice, Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brazil. 6. CNPq DT-2 Researcher on Mechanical Engineering Department at the Technological Center, Federal University of Santa Catarina, UFSC, Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brazil. 7. Full Professor, Post-graduate Program in Dentistry (PPGO), Center for Research and Education on Dental Implants (CEPID), School of Dentistry (ODT), Federal University of Santa Catarina, UFSC, Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brazil.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinically and radiographically, in humans, the healing of maxillary third molars postextraction sockets after application of different ridge preservation techniques 3 months after tooth extraction. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Twenty-six sockets (13 patients) were randomly assigned to 4 treatment modalities: deproteinized bovine bone mineral with 10% collagen (DBBM-C), poly(D,L-lactide-co-glycolide) with hydroxyapatite/β-TCP scaffold (PLGA/HA), PLGA/HA/β-TCP with 2.0% simvastatin scaffold (PLGA/HA/S), and spontaneous healing (control). Clinical complications were assessed, and cone-beam computed tomographies were taken in 5 patients 3 months after surgeries. For statistical purposes, the Fisher exact test was used (P < 0.05). RESULTS: After 3 months, 6 of 9 grafts from the PLGA/HA group were lost (P < 0.05). PLGA/HA/S' loss was only 2 of 8 (P > 0.05), but no loss was observed in the DBBM-C group. Pain was present in 3 of 8 sites that lost the graft (37.5%) (P > 0.05) and infection in 1 of 8 (12.5%) (P > 0.05), with these only occurring in the PLGA/HA group. CONCLUSIONS: Poly (D, L-lactide-co-glycolide) with hydroxyapatite/β-TCP (PLGA/HA/β-TCP) scaffolds, with and without simvastatin, failed to obtain the initial expected results and presented more complications. Scaffolds with simvastatin showed to be superior, with less clinical complications than scaffolds without simvastatin.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinically and radiographically, in humans, the healing of maxillary third molars postextraction sockets after application of different ridge preservation techniques 3 months after tooth extraction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-six sockets (13 patients) were randomly assigned to 4 treatment modalities: deproteinized bovine bone mineral with 10% collagen (DBBM-C), poly(D,L-lactide-co-glycolide) with hydroxyapatite/β-TCP scaffold (PLGA/HA), PLGA/HA/β-TCP with 2.0% simvastatin scaffold (PLGA/HA/S), and spontaneous healing (control). Clinical complications were assessed, and cone-beam computed tomographies were taken in 5 patients 3 months after surgeries. For statistical purposes, the Fisher exact test was used (P < 0.05). RESULTS: After 3 months, 6 of 9 grafts from the PLGA/HA group were lost (P < 0.05). PLGA/HA/S' loss was only 2 of 8 (P > 0.05), but no loss was observed in the DBBM-C group. Pain was present in 3 of 8 sites that lost the graft (37.5%) (P > 0.05) and infection in 1 of 8 (12.5%) (P > 0.05), with these only occurring in the PLGA/HA group. CONCLUSIONS:Poly (D, L-lactide-co-glycolide) with hydroxyapatite/β-TCP (PLGA/HA/β-TCP) scaffolds, with and without simvastatin, failed to obtain the initial expected results and presented more complications. Scaffolds with simvastatin showed to be superior, with less clinical complications than scaffolds without simvastatin.
Authors: Diana G Soares; Zhanpeng Zhang; Fatma Mohamed; Thomas W Eyster; Carlos A de Souza Costa; Peter X Ma Journal: Acta Biomater Date: 2017-12-30 Impact factor: 8.947
Authors: Jiordanne Araújo Diniz; Davi da Silva Barbirato; Eduarda Helena Leandro do Nascimento; Andrea Dos Anjos Pontual; Ana Cláudia Amorim Gomes Dourado; José Rodrigues Laureano Filho Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2022-01-22 Impact factor: 3.573