Robert Dłucik, Bogusława Orzechowska-Wylęgała, Daniel Dłucik, Domenico Puzzolo, Giuseppe Santoro, Antonio Micali, Barbara Testagrossa, Giuseppe Acri
{"title":"三种不同牙本质基质生物材料的临床疗效比较。","authors":"Robert Dłucik, Bogusława Orzechowska-Wylęgała, Daniel Dłucik, Domenico Puzzolo, Giuseppe Santoro, Antonio Micali, Barbara Testagrossa, Giuseppe Acri","doi":"10.1080/17434440.2023.2190512","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim of the present study was to propose the clinical efficacy of the different dentin matrix obtained from three devices (BonMaker, Tooth Transformer, and Smart Dentin Grinder) and to show their morphological, physical, and biochemical characteristics using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), energy-dispersive X-ray (EDX) spectroscopy, and Raman spectroscopy.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>The study included 70 patients who underwent bone augmentation using the BonMaker, Tooth Transformer, and Smart Dentin Grinder devices. In addition, 84 implants were placed. Furthermore, four samples, one for each device and one non-demineralized control, were analyzed with scanning electron microscopy (SEM), energy-dispersive X-ray analysis, and Raman spectroscopy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In all patients, augmentation of bone defects with ground dentin matrix was successful, and implants showed correct osseointegration. The morphological organization, the chemical composition, and the presence of organic molecules in the dentin samples processed by the three different devices were demonstrated using SEM, energy-dispersive X-ray analysis, and Raman spectroscopy.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Comparing BonMaker, Tooth Transformer, and Smart Dentin Grinder devices in our practice, we concluded that these systems, even with different structural and chemical differences of the dentin granules, have a comparable potential for obtaining regenerative material from the patient's own teeth.</p>","PeriodicalId":12330,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Medical Devices","volume":"20 4","pages":"313-327"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of clinical efficacy of three different dentin matrix biomaterials obtained from different devices.\",\"authors\":\"Robert Dłucik, Bogusława Orzechowska-Wylęgała, Daniel Dłucik, Domenico Puzzolo, Giuseppe Santoro, Antonio Micali, Barbara Testagrossa, Giuseppe Acri\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17434440.2023.2190512\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim of the present study was to propose the clinical efficacy of the different dentin matrix obtained from three devices (BonMaker, Tooth Transformer, and Smart Dentin Grinder) and to show their morphological, physical, and biochemical characteristics using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), energy-dispersive X-ray (EDX) spectroscopy, and Raman spectroscopy.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>The study included 70 patients who underwent bone augmentation using the BonMaker, Tooth Transformer, and Smart Dentin Grinder devices. In addition, 84 implants were placed. Furthermore, four samples, one for each device and one non-demineralized control, were analyzed with scanning electron microscopy (SEM), energy-dispersive X-ray analysis, and Raman spectroscopy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In all patients, augmentation of bone defects with ground dentin matrix was successful, and implants showed correct osseointegration. The morphological organization, the chemical composition, and the presence of organic molecules in the dentin samples processed by the three different devices were demonstrated using SEM, energy-dispersive X-ray analysis, and Raman spectroscopy.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Comparing BonMaker, Tooth Transformer, and Smart Dentin Grinder devices in our practice, we concluded that these systems, even with different structural and chemical differences of the dentin granules, have a comparable potential for obtaining regenerative material from the patient's own teeth.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12330,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Expert Review of Medical Devices\",\"volume\":\"20 4\",\"pages\":\"313-327\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Expert Review of Medical Devices\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17434440.2023.2190512\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Medical Devices","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17434440.2023.2190512","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of clinical efficacy of three different dentin matrix biomaterials obtained from different devices.
Aim: The aim of the present study was to propose the clinical efficacy of the different dentin matrix obtained from three devices (BonMaker, Tooth Transformer, and Smart Dentin Grinder) and to show their morphological, physical, and biochemical characteristics using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), energy-dispersive X-ray (EDX) spectroscopy, and Raman spectroscopy.
Research design and methods: The study included 70 patients who underwent bone augmentation using the BonMaker, Tooth Transformer, and Smart Dentin Grinder devices. In addition, 84 implants were placed. Furthermore, four samples, one for each device and one non-demineralized control, were analyzed with scanning electron microscopy (SEM), energy-dispersive X-ray analysis, and Raman spectroscopy.
Results: In all patients, augmentation of bone defects with ground dentin matrix was successful, and implants showed correct osseointegration. The morphological organization, the chemical composition, and the presence of organic molecules in the dentin samples processed by the three different devices were demonstrated using SEM, energy-dispersive X-ray analysis, and Raman spectroscopy.
Conclusions: Comparing BonMaker, Tooth Transformer, and Smart Dentin Grinder devices in our practice, we concluded that these systems, even with different structural and chemical differences of the dentin granules, have a comparable potential for obtaining regenerative material from the patient's own teeth.
期刊介绍:
The journal serves the device research community by providing a comprehensive body of high-quality information from leading experts, all subject to rigorous peer review. The Expert Review format is specially structured to optimize the value of the information to reader. Comprehensive coverage by each author in a key area of research or clinical practice is augmented by the following sections:
Expert commentary - a personal view on the most effective or promising strategies
Five-year view - a clear perspective of future prospects within a realistic timescale
Key issues - an executive summary cutting to the author''s most critical points
In addition to the Review program, each issue also features Medical Device Profiles - objective assessments of specific devices in development or clinical use to help inform clinical practice. There are also Perspectives - overviews highlighting areas of current debate and controversy, together with reports from the conference scene and invited Editorials.