当前位置:
X-MOL 学术
›
Clin. Oral. Implants Res.
›
论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your
feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Healing patterns of alveolar bone following ridge preservation procedures
Clinical Oral Implants Research ( IF 4.8 ) Pub Date : 2024-08-06 , DOI: 10.1111/clr.14332 Neil MacBeth 1, 2 , Nikos Mardas 1 , Graham Davis 3 , Nikos Donos 1
Clinical Oral Implants Research ( IF 4.8 ) Pub Date : 2024-08-06 , DOI: 10.1111/clr.14332 Neil MacBeth 1, 2 , Nikos Mardas 1 , Graham Davis 3 , Nikos Donos 1
Affiliation
ObjectivesExamine the histomorphometric bone composition, following alveolar ridge preservation techniques and unassisted socket healing.Materials and MethodsForty‐two patients (42) requiring a single rooted tooth extraction were randomly allocated into three groups (n = 14 per group): Group 1: Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR) using deproteinised bovine bone mineral (DBBM) and a porcine collagen membrane; Group 2: Socket Seal (SS) technique using DBBM and a porcine collagen matrix; Group 3: Unassisted socket healing (Control). Trephined bone biopsies were harvested following a 4‐month healing period. Forty‐two samples underwent Back‐Scattered Electrons ‐Scanning Electron Microscopy (BSE‐SEM) imaging, with 15 samples examined using Xray Micro‐Tomography (XMT) (n = 6 for each GBR/SS and n = 3 Control). Images were analysed to determine the percentage (%) of connective tissue, new bone formation, residual DBBM particles and direct bone to DBBM particle contact (osseointegration).ResultsBSE‐SEM analysis demonstrated that new bone formation was higher in the Control (45.89% ± 11.48) compared to both GBR (22.12% ± 12.7/p < .004) and SS (27.62% ± 17.76/p < .005) groups. The connective tissue percentage in GBR (49.72% ± 9), SS (47.81% ± 12.57) and Control (47.81% ± 12.57) groups was similar. GBR (28.17% ± 16.64) and SS (24.37% ± 18.61) groups had similar levels of residual DBBM particles. XMT volumetric analysis indicated a lower level of bone and DBBM particles in all test groups, when matched to the BSE‐SEM area measurements. Osseointegration levels (DBBM graft and bone) were recorded at 35.66% (± 9.8) for GBR and 31.18% (± 19.38) for SS.ConclusionGBR and SS ARP techniques presented with less bone formation when compared to unassisted healing. GBR had more direct contact/osseointegration between the DBBM particles and newly formed bone.
中文翻译:
牙槽嵴保留手术后牙槽骨的愈合模式
目的在牙槽嵴保留技术和无辅助窝愈合后检查组织形态学骨成分。材料和方法将 42 名需要拔除单根牙的患者 (42) 随机分为三组 (每组 n = 14):第 1 组:使用脱蛋白牛骨矿物质 (DBBM) 和猪胶原膜进行引导骨再生 (GBR);第 2 组:使用 DBBM 和猪胶原蛋白基质的接受腔密封 (SS) 技术;第 3 组:无辅助窝愈合(对照)。环钻骨活检在 4 个月愈合期后收获。42 个样品进行了背散射电子扫描电子显微镜 (BSE-SEM) 成像,其中 15 个样品使用 X 射线显微断层扫描 (XMT) 检查(每个 GBR/SS n = 6,对照 n = 3)。分析图像以确定结缔组织、新骨形成、残留 DBBM 颗粒和骨与 DBBM 颗粒直接接触(骨整合)的百分比 (%)。结果BSE-SEM 分析表明,与 GBR (22.12% ± 12.7/p < .004) 和 SS (27.62% ± 17.76/p < .005) 组相比,对照组 (45.89% ± 11.48) 的新骨形成更高。GBR (49.72% ± 9) 、SS (47.81% ± 12.57) 和对照组 (47.81% ± 12.57) 组的结缔组织百分比相似。GBR (28.17% ± 16.64) 和 SS (24.37% ± 18.61) 组具有相似的残留 DBBM 颗粒水平。XMT 体积分析表明,当与 BSE-SEM 面积测量值匹配时,所有测试组中的骨和 DBBM 颗粒水平较低。GBR 的骨整合水平 (DBBM 移植物和骨骼) 记录为 35.66% (± 9.8),SS 为 31.18% (± 19.38)。结论与无辅助愈合相比,GBR 和 SS ARP 技术表现出较少的骨形成。 GBR 在 DBBM 颗粒和新形成的骨骼之间有更直接的接触/骨整合。
更新日期:2024-08-06
中文翻译:
牙槽嵴保留手术后牙槽骨的愈合模式
目的在牙槽嵴保留技术和无辅助窝愈合后检查组织形态学骨成分。材料和方法将 42 名需要拔除单根牙的患者 (42) 随机分为三组 (每组 n = 14):第 1 组:使用脱蛋白牛骨矿物质 (DBBM) 和猪胶原膜进行引导骨再生 (GBR);第 2 组:使用 DBBM 和猪胶原蛋白基质的接受腔密封 (SS) 技术;第 3 组:无辅助窝愈合(对照)。环钻骨活检在 4 个月愈合期后收获。42 个样品进行了背散射电子扫描电子显微镜 (BSE-SEM) 成像,其中 15 个样品使用 X 射线显微断层扫描 (XMT) 检查(每个 GBR/SS n = 6,对照 n = 3)。分析图像以确定结缔组织、新骨形成、残留 DBBM 颗粒和骨与 DBBM 颗粒直接接触(骨整合)的百分比 (%)。结果BSE-SEM 分析表明,与 GBR (22.12% ± 12.7/p < .004) 和 SS (27.62% ± 17.76/p < .005) 组相比,对照组 (45.89% ± 11.48) 的新骨形成更高。GBR (49.72% ± 9) 、SS (47.81% ± 12.57) 和对照组 (47.81% ± 12.57) 组的结缔组织百分比相似。GBR (28.17% ± 16.64) 和 SS (24.37% ± 18.61) 组具有相似的残留 DBBM 颗粒水平。XMT 体积分析表明,当与 BSE-SEM 面积测量值匹配时,所有测试组中的骨和 DBBM 颗粒水平较低。GBR 的骨整合水平 (DBBM 移植物和骨骼) 记录为 35.66% (± 9.8),SS 为 31.18% (± 19.38)。结论与无辅助愈合相比,GBR 和 SS ARP 技术表现出较少的骨形成。 GBR 在 DBBM 颗粒和新形成的骨骼之间有更直接的接触/骨整合。