Intra-oral bone harvesting: two methods compared using histological and histomorphometric assessments

Aim: This study used morphometric analyses to compare two methods for the intra‐oral harvesting of particulate bone: Mectron Piezosurgery® and the Meta Micross®. Materials and methods: Twenty patients requiring bilateral germectomy of the lower third molars for orthodontic reasons were selected and a sample was harvested from each patient from a standardised donor site (the cortical bone in the area of the retromolar triangle). Ten samples were obtained for each method. The particulate collected were subjected to a histological examination and the samples were analysed considering the following parameters: the mean surface area of fragments, the mean surface area considered vital and the mean surface area considered non‐vital, the mean percentage of area considered vital and the mean percentage of area considered non‐vital, the mean number of normal osteocytes and the mean number of osteocytes with morphological changes identified per unit area (600,000 μm²). The results were analysed, calculating the mean and the corresponding standard deviations, and testing their significance using Student's t‐test, and plotted in graphs. Results: Mectron Piezosurgery® produced significantly larger particles (P<0.05) than the Meta Micross®, with a larger mean surface area considered vital and a significantly larger (P<0.05) surface area considered non‐vital. Mectron Piezosurgery® also produced a smaller mean percentage of area considered vital (64.83%) and a larger mean percentage of area considered non‐vital (35.17%) by comparison with the Meta Micross® (75.34% and 24.66%, respectively). The data also showed that the two methods produce a similar quantity of empty lacunae, and that the Mectron Piezosurgery® produces a larger quantity of osteocytes. Conclusions: The analyses conducted demonstrated that the particulate collected with the Meta Micross® had a smaller mean surface area of the fragments and a smaller surface area of bone considered non‐vital than in the particulate collected using Mectron Piezosurgery®. To cite this article:
Bacci C, Lucchiari N, Valente M, Della Barbera M, Frigo AC, Berengo M. Intra‐oral bone harvesting: two methods compared using histological and histomorphometric assessments. Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 22 , 2011; 600–605.
doi: 10.1111/j.1600‐0501.2010.02022.x