Ayuda
Ir al contenido

Dialnet


Histological Comparison of Healing Extraction Sockets Implanted With Bioactive Glass or Demineralized Freeze-Dried Bone Allograft: A Pilot Study

  • Autores: Dr. Stuart Froum, Sang-Choon Cho, Edwin S. Rosenberg, Michael D. Rohrer, Dennis Tarnow
  • Localización: Journal of periodontology, ISSN 0022-3492, Vol. 73, Nº. 1, 2002, págs. 94-102
  • Idioma: inglés
  • Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
  • Resumen
    • Background: Various materials have been used immediately following tooth extraction to fill and/or cover the socket in an attempt to limit or prevent ridge resorption. The purpose of the present pilot study was to establish a reliable model to investigate the effect of various bone graft and bone replacement materials on extraction socket healing. This study also compared healing extraction sockets 6 to 8 months postimplantation of a bioactive glass (BG) or demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft (DFDBA) to an unfilled socket control (C).

      Methods: Following tooth extraction, a total of 30 sockets in 19 patients were randomly divided into 3 treatment groups: 10 sockets received BG, 10 sockets DFDBA, and 10 sockets served as unfilled controls. Primary coverage was achieved by flap advancement over each socket. Six to 8 months postextraction at time of implant placement, histological cores of the treatment sites were obtained. These cores were processed, undecalcified sections prepared and stained with Stevenel blue/van Gieson's picric fuchsin, and histomorphometrically analyzed. Vital bone, connective tissue and marrow, and residual graft particles were reported as a percentage of the total core.

      Results: A model system was described in humans and used to evaluate the healing response in the 3 treatment groups. Results concluded that mean vital bone present was 59.5% for BG-, 34.7% for DFDBA-, and 32.4% for C-treated sites. These differences were not statistically significant. However, the residual implant material was significantly higher in DFDBA-treated (13.5%) versus BG-treated sockets (5.5%).

      Conclusions: Although the differences in percent vital bone were not statistically significant among the 3 treatment groups in this pilot study, BG material was observed to act as an osteoconductive material which had a positive effect on socket healing at 6 to 8 months postextraction. Further research following implant placement in treated and control sockets is warranted to determine if bone implant contact is improved in BG-filled versus unfilled sockets.


Fundación Dialnet

Dialnet Plus

  • Más información sobre Dialnet Plus

Opciones de compartir

Opciones de entorno