| Literature DB >> 34522647 |
Danial Babaki1, Masoumeh Khoshsimaybargard2, Sanam Yaghoubi3, Mahdi Gholami4,5.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The significance of membranes as wound dressing in oral surgeries has been reported by previous studies. The aim of the present split-mouth randomized clinical study was to assess and compare the wound dressing properties of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) and cryopreserved human amniotic membrane (AM) after reconstructive preprosthetic oral surgery.Entities:
Keywords: Acellular dermal matrix; CD68+ cell; cryopreserved human amniotic membrane; vestibular depth; vestibuloplasty
Year: 2021 PMID: 34522647 PMCID: PMC8407648 DOI: 10.4103/ams.ams_322_20
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Maxillofac Surg ISSN: 2231-0746
Figure 1Preoperative radiographs: (a) Lateral cephalometric radiograph demonstrating the inclination of the anterior wall of the mandible symphysis. (b) Panoramic radiograph demonstrating adequate bone height for vestibuloplasty
Figure 2Vestibuloplasty: (a) Apically positioned supraperiosteal flap. (b) Suturing of amniotic membrane and acellular dermal matrix to denuded periosteum. (c) Fixing the lined splint by bone screws. (d) Surgical site 2 weeks postoperatively. (e) Surgical site 3 months postoperatively
Reduction rate in vestibule depth at different time intervals
| Time intervals | AM group | ADM group |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 week | 0.173±0.021a | 0.085±0.013 | 0.011* |
| 2 weeks | 0.228±0.016 | 0.159±0.017 | 0.032* |
| 1 month | 0.264±0.014 | 0.168±0.020 | 0.008** |
| 3 months | 0.318±0.022 | 0.217±0.017 | 0.007** |
*P<0.05 and **P<0.01, respectively, aData are expressed as mean±SEM of the reduction rate (n=28 patients/group). ADM: Acellular dermal matrix, AM: Amniotic membrane, SEM: Standard error of mean
Figure 3The trend of reduction rate in vestibule depth among AM and ADM groups. Assessing the relapse of vestibule depth showed that the reduction rate was significantly higher in amniotic membrane-covered regions than ADM group at four different points of follow-up within 3 months. The trend of reduction rate was similar in two groups. * and ** indicate P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively.
Figure 4Cell surface marker expression profile of extracted cells. Flow cytometric analysis demonstrating that obtained cells can be categorized into negative (a) and positive (b) for CD68. Only representative examples are shown here
Figure 5Macrophage infiltration assessment. (a) Number of macrophages at different sites and time intervals. (b) Representative data for CD68+ cells based on the CD68+ gate; the numbers indicate the absolute number of macrophages per gram of wet tissue. aData are expressed as mean ± standard error of the mean for 28 patients/group. *indicates P < 0.05