Ridge Preservation With Acellular Dermal Matrix and Anorganic Bone Matrix Cell‐Binding Peptide P‐15 After Tooth Extraction in Humans |
| |
Authors: | Patricia Garani Fernandes Arthur B Novaes Jr Adriana Correa de Queiroz Sergio Luis Scombatti de Souza Mario Taba Jr Daniela Bazan Palioto Marcio Fernando de Moraes Grisi |
| |
Institution: | Department of Oral Surgery and Periodontology, Ribeir?o Preto School of Dentistry, University of S?o Paulo, Ribeir?o Preto, S?o Paulo, Brazil. |
| |
Abstract: | Background: Preventing ridge collapse with the extraction of maxillary anterior teeth is vital to an esthetic restorative result. Several regenerative techniques are available and are used for socket preservation. The aim of this study is to analyze by clinical parameters the use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) and anorganic bovine bone matrix (ABM) with synthetic cell‐binding peptide P‐15 to preserve alveolar bone after tooth extraction. Methods: Eighteen patients in need of extraction of maxillary anterior teeth were selected and randomly assigned to the test group (ADM plus ABM/P‐15) or the control group (ADM only). Clinical measurements were recorded initially and at 6 months after ridge‐preservation procedures. Results: In the clinical measurements (external vertical palatal measurement EVPM], external vertical buccal measurement EVBM], and alveolar horizontal measurement AHM]) the statistical analysis showed no difference between test and control groups initially and at 6 months. The intragroup analysis, after 6 months, showed a statistically significant reduction in the measurements for both groups. In the comparison between the two groups, the differences in the test group were as follows: EVPM = 0.83 ± 1.53 mm; EVBM = 1.20 ± 2.02 mm; and AHM = 2.53 ± 1.81 mm. The differences in the control group were as follows: EVPM = 0.87 ± 1.13 mm; EVBM = 1.50 ± 1.15 mm; and AHM = 3.40 ± 1.39 mm. The differences in EVPM and EVBM were not statistically significant; however, in horizontal measurement (AHM), there was a statistically significant difference (P<0.05). Conclusion: The results of this study show that ADM used as membrane associated with ABM/P‐15 can be used to reduce buccal‐palatal dimensions compared to ADM alone for preservation of the alveolar ridge after extraction of anterior maxillary teeth. |
| |
Keywords: | Biocompatible materials bone regeneration grafting bone socket graft tooth extraction |
|
|