{"title":"牙本质衍生牙移植在上颌与下颌牙槽窝保存中的组织学比较分析:178 例病例的回顾性研究。","authors":"Elio Minetti, Francesco Gianfreda, Patrizio Bollero, Ciro Annicchiarico, Monica Daniele, Rossella Padula, Filiberto Mastrangelo","doi":"10.3390/dj12100320","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>(1) Background: In recent years, there has been a growing interest in tooth-derived materials as valuable alternatives to synthetic biomaterials for preventing alveolar ridge dimensional changes. This study aimed to evaluate the histological and clinical differences between alveolar ridge preservation procedures in the maxilla and mandible using demineralized dentin treated with Tooth Transformer<sup>®</sup>. (2) Methods: A total of 178 patients in good general health were enrolled, with 187 post-extractive sockets lacking buccal and/or palatal bone walls. Alveolar socket preservation procedures and histological evaluations were performed. The sites were divided into two groups: Group A (99 mandibular samples) and Group B (108 maxillary samples). After 5 months (±1 month), single bone biopsies were performed for histologic and histomorphometric analysis. (3) Results: Clinical outcomes demonstrated a good healing of hard and soft tissues with an effective maintenance of bone architecture in both groups. Histomorphometric analysis revealed a total bone volume of 50.33% (±14.86) in Group A compared to 43.53% (±12.73) in Group B. The vital new bone volume was 40.59% (±19.90) in Group A versus 29.70% (±17.68) in Group B, with residual graft dentin material volume at 7.95% (±9.85) in Group A compared to 6.75% (±9.62) in Group B. (4) Conclusions: These results indicate that tooth-derived material supports hard tissue reconstruction by following the structure of the surrounding bone tissue. A 6.8% difference observed between the maxilla and mandible reflects the inherent disparities in natural bone structures in these regions. This suggests that the bone regeneration process after tooth extraction adheres to an anatomical functional pattern that reflects the specific bone characteristics of each area, thus contributing to the preservation of the morphology and functionality of the surrounding bone tissue.</p>","PeriodicalId":11269,"journal":{"name":"Dentistry Journal","volume":"12 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11505686/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Histological Analysis of Dentine-Derived Tooth Grafts in Maxillary vs Mandibular Socket Preservation: A Retrospective Study of 178 Cases.\",\"authors\":\"Elio Minetti, Francesco Gianfreda, Patrizio Bollero, Ciro Annicchiarico, Monica Daniele, Rossella Padula, Filiberto Mastrangelo\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/dj12100320\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>(1) Background: In recent years, there has been a growing interest in tooth-derived materials as valuable alternatives to synthetic biomaterials for preventing alveolar ridge dimensional changes. This study aimed to evaluate the histological and clinical differences between alveolar ridge preservation procedures in the maxilla and mandible using demineralized dentin treated with Tooth Transformer<sup>®</sup>. (2) Methods: A total of 178 patients in good general health were enrolled, with 187 post-extractive sockets lacking buccal and/or palatal bone walls. Alveolar socket preservation procedures and histological evaluations were performed. The sites were divided into two groups: Group A (99 mandibular samples) and Group B (108 maxillary samples). After 5 months (±1 month), single bone biopsies were performed for histologic and histomorphometric analysis. (3) Results: Clinical outcomes demonstrated a good healing of hard and soft tissues with an effective maintenance of bone architecture in both groups. Histomorphometric analysis revealed a total bone volume of 50.33% (±14.86) in Group A compared to 43.53% (±12.73) in Group B. The vital new bone volume was 40.59% (±19.90) in Group A versus 29.70% (±17.68) in Group B, with residual graft dentin material volume at 7.95% (±9.85) in Group A compared to 6.75% (±9.62) in Group B. (4) Conclusions: These results indicate that tooth-derived material supports hard tissue reconstruction by following the structure of the surrounding bone tissue. A 6.8% difference observed between the maxilla and mandible reflects the inherent disparities in natural bone structures in these regions. This suggests that the bone regeneration process after tooth extraction adheres to an anatomical functional pattern that reflects the specific bone characteristics of each area, thus contributing to the preservation of the morphology and functionality of the surrounding bone tissue.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11269,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dentistry Journal\",\"volume\":\"12 10\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11505686/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dentistry Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/dj12100320\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dentistry Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/dj12100320","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
(1) 背景:近年来,越来越多的人开始关注牙源性材料,将其作为预防牙槽嵴尺寸变化的合成生物材料的重要替代品。本研究旨在评估使用牙齿转化器®处理的脱矿牙本质在上颌骨和下颌骨牙槽嵴保存过程中的组织学和临床差异。(2)方法:共招募了 178 名健康状况良好的患者,其中 187 名患者的拔牙后牙槽窝缺乏颊骨和/或腭骨壁。进行了牙槽窝保存手术和组织学评估。这些部位被分为两组:A 组(99 个下颌样本)和 B 组(108 个上颌样本)。5 个月后(±1 个月),对单个骨活检进行组织学和组织形态学分析。(3)结果:临床结果表明,两组患者的软硬组织愈合良好,骨结构得到有效维护。组织形态学分析显示,A 组的骨总量为 50.33%(±14.86),而 B 组为 43.53%(±12.73);A 组的重要新骨量为 40.59%(±19.90),而 B 组为 29.70%(±17.68);A 组的残留移植牙本质材料量为 7.95%(±9.85),而 B 组为 6.75%(±9.62)。(4)结论:这些结果表明,牙源性材料通过遵循周围骨组织的结构来支持硬组织重建。在上颌骨和下颌骨之间观察到的 6.8% 的差异反映了这些区域天然骨结构的固有差异。这表明,拔牙后的骨再生过程遵循一种解剖学功能模式,这种模式反映了每个区域特定的骨特征,从而有助于保护周围骨组织的形态和功能。
Comparative Histological Analysis of Dentine-Derived Tooth Grafts in Maxillary vs Mandibular Socket Preservation: A Retrospective Study of 178 Cases.
(1) Background: In recent years, there has been a growing interest in tooth-derived materials as valuable alternatives to synthetic biomaterials for preventing alveolar ridge dimensional changes. This study aimed to evaluate the histological and clinical differences between alveolar ridge preservation procedures in the maxilla and mandible using demineralized dentin treated with Tooth Transformer®. (2) Methods: A total of 178 patients in good general health were enrolled, with 187 post-extractive sockets lacking buccal and/or palatal bone walls. Alveolar socket preservation procedures and histological evaluations were performed. The sites were divided into two groups: Group A (99 mandibular samples) and Group B (108 maxillary samples). After 5 months (±1 month), single bone biopsies were performed for histologic and histomorphometric analysis. (3) Results: Clinical outcomes demonstrated a good healing of hard and soft tissues with an effective maintenance of bone architecture in both groups. Histomorphometric analysis revealed a total bone volume of 50.33% (±14.86) in Group A compared to 43.53% (±12.73) in Group B. The vital new bone volume was 40.59% (±19.90) in Group A versus 29.70% (±17.68) in Group B, with residual graft dentin material volume at 7.95% (±9.85) in Group A compared to 6.75% (±9.62) in Group B. (4) Conclusions: These results indicate that tooth-derived material supports hard tissue reconstruction by following the structure of the surrounding bone tissue. A 6.8% difference observed between the maxilla and mandible reflects the inherent disparities in natural bone structures in these regions. This suggests that the bone regeneration process after tooth extraction adheres to an anatomical functional pattern that reflects the specific bone characteristics of each area, thus contributing to the preservation of the morphology and functionality of the surrounding bone tissue.