{"title":"保留牙槽嵴的牙槽窝封闭手术中异种脱矿牙基质的能力:随机对照临床试验。","authors":"Kannika Bureekanchan, Narit Leepong, Srisurang Suttapreyasri","doi":"10.1007/s00784-024-05879-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess and compare the clinical, radiological, and histological outcomes of socket seal surgery between two protocols: deproteinized demineralized tooth matrix (dpDTM) and freeze-dried bone allograft (FDBA) each covered with a free gingival graft.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Twenty extraction sockets in the anterior or premolar region were randomly allocated to either the dpDTM or FDBA protocol (n = 10 per group). Measurements of the alveolar ridge changes were obtained using an intraoral scanner and cone-beam computed tomography at 3 months post-operation. Three-month post surgery, the dental implant was installed (n = 5 per group), bone biopsies were obtained for histomorphometrical and micro-computed tomography analyses. Implant stability quotients (ISQs) were determined and compared at 3 months post-implant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Lower significant reductions in buccal alveolar ridge height and hard tissue volume were observed in dpDTM group compared to FDBA group at 3 months (0.25 ± 0.35 mm vs. 1.60 ± 0.66 mm [p = .000] and 9.64 ± 15.39% mm<sup>3</sup> vs. 31.45 ± 18.11% mm<sup>3</sup> [p = .010], respectively). At the same time, lower soft tissue volume reduction was detected in the dpDTM group compared to FDBA group (4.21 ± 5.25% mm<sup>3</sup> vs. 5.25 ± 5.79% mm<sup>3</sup>). No statistically significant difference in the percentage of mineralized tissue formation was found between dpDTM group (53.39 ± 11.16%) and FDBA group (49.90 ± 3.27%). Even though the ISQ in the dpDTM group showed a higher value than the FDBA group at 3 months post-implant, the results were without statistical significance.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Alveolar ridge preservation using dpDTM is an efficacious procedure for providing the conditions for the development of functional and esthetic implants.</p>","PeriodicalId":10461,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Investigations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Competence of allogenic demineralized tooth matrix in socket seal surgery for alveolar ridge preservation: a randomized control clinical trial.\",\"authors\":\"Kannika Bureekanchan, Narit Leepong, Srisurang Suttapreyasri\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00784-024-05879-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess and compare the clinical, radiological, and histological outcomes of socket seal surgery between two protocols: deproteinized demineralized tooth matrix (dpDTM) and freeze-dried bone allograft (FDBA) each covered with a free gingival graft.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Twenty extraction sockets in the anterior or premolar region were randomly allocated to either the dpDTM or FDBA protocol (n = 10 per group). Measurements of the alveolar ridge changes were obtained using an intraoral scanner and cone-beam computed tomography at 3 months post-operation. Three-month post surgery, the dental implant was installed (n = 5 per group), bone biopsies were obtained for histomorphometrical and micro-computed tomography analyses. Implant stability quotients (ISQs) were determined and compared at 3 months post-implant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Lower significant reductions in buccal alveolar ridge height and hard tissue volume were observed in dpDTM group compared to FDBA group at 3 months (0.25 ± 0.35 mm vs. 1.60 ± 0.66 mm [p = .000] and 9.64 ± 15.39% mm<sup>3</sup> vs. 31.45 ± 18.11% mm<sup>3</sup> [p = .010], respectively). At the same time, lower soft tissue volume reduction was detected in the dpDTM group compared to FDBA group (4.21 ± 5.25% mm<sup>3</sup> vs. 5.25 ± 5.79% mm<sup>3</sup>). No statistically significant difference in the percentage of mineralized tissue formation was found between dpDTM group (53.39 ± 11.16%) and FDBA group (49.90 ± 3.27%). Even though the ISQ in the dpDTM group showed a higher value than the FDBA group at 3 months post-implant, the results were without statistical significance.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Alveolar ridge preservation using dpDTM is an efficacious procedure for providing the conditions for the development of functional and esthetic implants.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10461,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Oral Investigations\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Oral Investigations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-024-05879-w\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Oral Investigations","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-024-05879-w","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Competence of allogenic demineralized tooth matrix in socket seal surgery for alveolar ridge preservation: a randomized control clinical trial.
Objectives: To assess and compare the clinical, radiological, and histological outcomes of socket seal surgery between two protocols: deproteinized demineralized tooth matrix (dpDTM) and freeze-dried bone allograft (FDBA) each covered with a free gingival graft.
Materials and methods: Twenty extraction sockets in the anterior or premolar region were randomly allocated to either the dpDTM or FDBA protocol (n = 10 per group). Measurements of the alveolar ridge changes were obtained using an intraoral scanner and cone-beam computed tomography at 3 months post-operation. Three-month post surgery, the dental implant was installed (n = 5 per group), bone biopsies were obtained for histomorphometrical and micro-computed tomography analyses. Implant stability quotients (ISQs) were determined and compared at 3 months post-implant.
Results: Lower significant reductions in buccal alveolar ridge height and hard tissue volume were observed in dpDTM group compared to FDBA group at 3 months (0.25 ± 0.35 mm vs. 1.60 ± 0.66 mm [p = .000] and 9.64 ± 15.39% mm3 vs. 31.45 ± 18.11% mm3 [p = .010], respectively). At the same time, lower soft tissue volume reduction was detected in the dpDTM group compared to FDBA group (4.21 ± 5.25% mm3 vs. 5.25 ± 5.79% mm3). No statistically significant difference in the percentage of mineralized tissue formation was found between dpDTM group (53.39 ± 11.16%) and FDBA group (49.90 ± 3.27%). Even though the ISQ in the dpDTM group showed a higher value than the FDBA group at 3 months post-implant, the results were without statistical significance.
Conclusions: Alveolar ridge preservation using dpDTM is an efficacious procedure for providing the conditions for the development of functional and esthetic implants.
期刊介绍:
The journal Clinical Oral Investigations is a multidisciplinary, international forum for publication of research from all fields of oral medicine. The journal publishes original scientific articles and invited reviews which provide up-to-date results of basic and clinical studies in oral and maxillofacial science and medicine. The aim is to clarify the relevance of new results to modern practice, for an international readership. Coverage includes maxillofacial and oral surgery, prosthetics and restorative dentistry, operative dentistry, endodontics, periodontology, orthodontics, dental materials science, clinical trials, epidemiology, pedodontics, oral implant, preventive dentistiry, oral pathology, oral basic sciences and more.