Vrisiis Kofina1, Mutlu Demirer2, Barbaros S Erdal2, Timothy D Eubank3, Vedat O Yildiz4, Dimitris N Tatakis1, Binnaz Leblebicioglu1. 1. Division of Periodontology, College of Dentistry, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA. 2. Department of Radiology, College of Medicine, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA. 3. Department of Microbiology, Immunology, & Cell Biology, College of Medicine, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA. 4. Department of Biomedical Informatics, Center for Biostatistics, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine and compare soft tissue healing outcomes following implant placement in grafted (GG) and non-grafted bone (NGG). METHODS: Patients receiving single implant in a tooth-bound maxillary non-molar site were recruited. Clinical healing was documented. Volume and content of wound fluid (WF; at 3, 6, and 9 days) were compared with adjacent gingival crevicular fluid (GCF; at baseline, 1, and 4 months). Buccal flap blood perfusion recovery and changes in bone thickness were recorded. Linear mixed model regression analysis and generalized estimating equations with Bonferroni adjustments were conducted for repeated measures. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients (49 ± 4 years; 13 males; nine NGG) completed the study. Soft tissue closure was slower in GG (P < 0.01). Differential response in WF/GCF protein concentrations was detected for ACTH (increased in GG only) and insulin, leptin, osteocalcin (decreased in NGG only) at day 6 (P ≤0.04), with no inter-group differences at any time(P > 0.05). Blood perfusion rate decreased immediately postoperatively (P < 0.01, GG) followed by 3-day hyperemia (P > 0.05 both groups). The recovery to baseline values was almost complete for NGG whereas GG stayed ischemic even at 4 months (P = 0.05). Buccal bone thickness changes were significant in GG sites (P ≤ 0.05). CONCLUSION: History of bone grafting alters the clinical, physiological, and molecular healing response of overlying soft tissues after implant placement surgery.
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine and compare soft tissue healing outcomes following implant placement in grafted (GG) and non-grafted bone (NGG). METHODS:Patients receiving single implant in a tooth-bound maxillary non-molar site were recruited. Clinical healing was documented. Volume and content of wound fluid (WF; at 3, 6, and 9 days) were compared with adjacent gingival crevicular fluid (GCF; at baseline, 1, and 4 months). Buccal flap blood perfusion recovery and changes in bone thickness were recorded. Linear mixed model regression analysis and generalized estimating equations with Bonferroni adjustments were conducted for repeated measures. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients (49 ± 4 years; 13 males; nine NGG) completed the study. Soft tissue closure was slower in GG (P < 0.01). Differential response in WF/GCF protein concentrations was detected for ACTH (increased in GG only) and insulin, leptin, osteocalcin (decreased in NGG only) at day 6 (P ≤0.04), with no inter-group differences at any time(P > 0.05). Blood perfusion rate decreased immediately postoperatively (P < 0.01, GG) followed by 3-day hyperemia (P > 0.05 both groups). The recovery to baseline values was almost complete for NGG whereas GG stayed ischemic even at 4 months (P = 0.05). Buccal bone thickness changes were significant in GG sites (P ≤ 0.05). CONCLUSION: History of bone grafting alters the clinical, physiological, and molecular healing response of overlying soft tissues after implant placement surgery.
Authors: Luigi Canullo; Paolo Pesce; Donato Antonacci; Andrea Ravidà; Matthew Galli; Shahnawaz Khijmatgar; Grazia Tommasato; Anton Sculean; Massimo Del Fabbro Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2021-10-20 Impact factor: 3.606