Ridge preservation comparing the clinical and histologic healing of a mineralized cortical vs. mineralized cancellous allograft with an acellular dermal matrix barrier membrane.
Date on Master's Thesis/Doctoral Dissertation
Gums--Surgery; Bone-grafting; Dental implants
Aim. To compare two techniques of ridge preservation using a mineralized cancellous particulate allograft to a mineralized cortical particulate allograft plus an acelluar dermal matrix barrier membrane using clinical and histologic data to assess the outcome. Methods. Twelve positive controls received a intrasocket mineralized cortical particulate allograft (500-800 µm) while twelve test patients received an intrasocket mineralized cancellous particulate allograft (500 to 800 µm). All sites were covered with acellular dermal matrix barrier. Following tooth extraction, horizontal ridge dimensions were measured with a digital caliper and vertical ridge dimensions were measured from a stent. Each site was re-entered for implant placement at about 4 months. Prior to implant placement, a 2.7 X 6 mm trephine core was obtained and preserved in formalin for histologic analysis. Results. The mean horizontal ridge width at the crest of the Cancellous group decreased from 8.4 ± 1.1 mm to 6.3 ± 1.6 mm for a mean loss of 2.0 ± 1.6 mm (p < 0.05) while the Cortical group decreased from 8.6 ± 2.0 mm to 6.7 ± 2.3 mm for a mean loss of 1.9 ± 1.4 mm (p < 0.05). There were no statistically significance differences between the two groups (p > 0.05). The mean mid-buccal vertical change for the Cancellous group was gain of 1.3 ± 3.3 mm (p > 0.05) vs. a gain of 2.5 ± 3.2 mm for the Cortical group (p > 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between groups for vertical change (p > 0.05). Histologic analysis revealed that the Cancellous group had 37 ± 13% vital bone, 21 ± 13% non-vital bone, 43 ± 6% trabecular space, while the Cortical group revealed 19 ± 10% vital bone, 38 ± 11 % non-vital bone, and 43 ± 11 % trabecular space. There were statistically significant differences between groups for vital and novital bone but not for trabecular space (p > 0.05). Conclusions. Both treatments were effective in the preservation of horizontal and vertical ridge dimensions for future implant placement, however, the Cancellous group had more vital bone and less non-vital bone than the Cortical group.
Sams, Marquez J., "Ridge preservation comparing the clinical and histologic healing of a mineralized cortical vs. mineralized cancellous allograft with an acellular dermal matrix barrier membrane." (2010). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 1258.