Implants Survival Rate in Regenerated Sites with Innovative Graft Biomaterials: 1 Year Follow-Up
In thirteen different dental clinics in Singapore, Spain, Czech Republic and Italy, 504 patients were selected, and 483 dental implants were placed in maxillary sites after alveolar socket preservation (ASP) procedures with an autologous demineralized tooth extracted as graft material from an innova...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2021-09-01
|
| Series: | Materials |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/14/18/5292 |
| _version_ | 1797518348258377728 |
|---|---|
| author | Elio Minetti Martin Celko Marcello Contessi Fabrizio Carini Ugo Gambardella Edoardo Giacometti Jesus Santillana Tomas Beca Campoy Johannes H. Schmitz Mauro Libertucci Henrykim Ho Simon Haan Filiberto Mastrangelo |
| author_facet | Elio Minetti Martin Celko Marcello Contessi Fabrizio Carini Ugo Gambardella Edoardo Giacometti Jesus Santillana Tomas Beca Campoy Johannes H. Schmitz Mauro Libertucci Henrykim Ho Simon Haan Filiberto Mastrangelo |
| author_sort | Elio Minetti |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | In thirteen different dental clinics in Singapore, Spain, Czech Republic and Italy, 504 patients were selected, and 483 dental implants were placed in maxillary sites after alveolar socket preservation (ASP) procedures with an autologous demineralized tooth extracted as graft material from an innovative Tooth Transformer device was obtained. All procedures used were reported in n°638 Ethical Committee surgical protocol of University of Chieti and approved. After 4 months, at dental implant placing, bone biopsies were performed to evaluate the histologic outcomes, and 12 months after implant loading, global implant survival rate, failure percentage and peri-implant bone loss were detected. After ASP, only 27 post-operative complications were observed and after 4 months, bone biopsy histomorphometric analysis showed a high percentage of bone volume (BV) 43.58 (±12.09), and vital new bone (NB) 32.38 (±17.15) with an absence of inflammation or necrosis areas. Twelve months after loading, only 10 dental implants failed (2.3%), with a 98.2% overall implant survival rate, nine cases showed mucositis (1.8%) and eight showed peri-implantitis (1.6%). At mesial sites, 0.43 mm (±0.83) of bone loss around the implants was detected and 0.23 mm (±0.38) at the distal sites with an average value of 0.37 mm (±0.68) (<i>p</i> > 0.568). Several studies with a longer follow-up will be necessary to confirm the preliminary data observed. However, clinical results seem to suggest that the post-extraction socket preservation procedure using innovative demineralized autologous tooth-derived biomaterial may be a predictable procedure to produce new vital bone able to support dental implant rehabilitation of maxilla edentulous sites. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-10T07:28:37Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-0598556786d84e1c898ffbd14680387b |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1996-1944 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-10T07:28:37Z |
| publishDate | 2021-09-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Materials |
| spelling | doaj.art-0598556786d84e1c898ffbd14680387b2023-11-22T14:01:49ZengMDPI AGMaterials1996-19442021-09-011418529210.3390/ma14185292Implants Survival Rate in Regenerated Sites with Innovative Graft Biomaterials: 1 Year Follow-UpElio Minetti0Martin Celko1Marcello Contessi2Fabrizio Carini3Ugo Gambardella4Edoardo Giacometti5Jesus Santillana6Tomas Beca Campoy7Johannes H. Schmitz8Mauro Libertucci9Henrykim Ho10Simon Haan11Filiberto Mastrangelo12Department of Biomedical, Surgical, Dental Science, University of Milan, 20161 Milan, ItalyIndependent Researcher, 500 02 Hradec Kralove, Czech RepublicIndependent Researcher, 34121 Trieste, ItalyDepartment School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano Bicocca, 20100 Milan, ItalyIndependent Researcher, 24068 Seriate, ItalyDepartment of Medical Sciences and Diagnostic Integrated, University of Genoa, 16121 Genova, ItalyIndependent Researcher, 48001 Bilbao, SpainIndependent Researcher, 28006 Madrid, SpainIndependent Researcher, 20100 Milan, ItalyIndependent Researcher, 00010 Rome, ItalyIndependent Researcher, Singapore 238863, SingaporeIndependent Researcher, Singapore 238863, SingaporeClinical and Experimental Medicine Department, School of Dentistry University of Foggia, 71122 Foggia, ItalyIn thirteen different dental clinics in Singapore, Spain, Czech Republic and Italy, 504 patients were selected, and 483 dental implants were placed in maxillary sites after alveolar socket preservation (ASP) procedures with an autologous demineralized tooth extracted as graft material from an innovative Tooth Transformer device was obtained. All procedures used were reported in n°638 Ethical Committee surgical protocol of University of Chieti and approved. After 4 months, at dental implant placing, bone biopsies were performed to evaluate the histologic outcomes, and 12 months after implant loading, global implant survival rate, failure percentage and peri-implant bone loss were detected. After ASP, only 27 post-operative complications were observed and after 4 months, bone biopsy histomorphometric analysis showed a high percentage of bone volume (BV) 43.58 (±12.09), and vital new bone (NB) 32.38 (±17.15) with an absence of inflammation or necrosis areas. Twelve months after loading, only 10 dental implants failed (2.3%), with a 98.2% overall implant survival rate, nine cases showed mucositis (1.8%) and eight showed peri-implantitis (1.6%). At mesial sites, 0.43 mm (±0.83) of bone loss around the implants was detected and 0.23 mm (±0.38) at the distal sites with an average value of 0.37 mm (±0.68) (<i>p</i> > 0.568). Several studies with a longer follow-up will be necessary to confirm the preliminary data observed. However, clinical results seem to suggest that the post-extraction socket preservation procedure using innovative demineralized autologous tooth-derived biomaterial may be a predictable procedure to produce new vital bone able to support dental implant rehabilitation of maxilla edentulous sites.https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/14/18/5292alveolar socket preservationdental implantsdental implants survival rateperi-implant bone lossbone graftsguided bone regeneration |
| spellingShingle | Elio Minetti Martin Celko Marcello Contessi Fabrizio Carini Ugo Gambardella Edoardo Giacometti Jesus Santillana Tomas Beca Campoy Johannes H. Schmitz Mauro Libertucci Henrykim Ho Simon Haan Filiberto Mastrangelo Implants Survival Rate in Regenerated Sites with Innovative Graft Biomaterials: 1 Year Follow-Up Materials alveolar socket preservation dental implants dental implants survival rate peri-implant bone loss bone grafts guided bone regeneration |
| title | Implants Survival Rate in Regenerated Sites with Innovative Graft Biomaterials: 1 Year Follow-Up |
| title_full | Implants Survival Rate in Regenerated Sites with Innovative Graft Biomaterials: 1 Year Follow-Up |
| title_fullStr | Implants Survival Rate in Regenerated Sites with Innovative Graft Biomaterials: 1 Year Follow-Up |
| title_full_unstemmed | Implants Survival Rate in Regenerated Sites with Innovative Graft Biomaterials: 1 Year Follow-Up |
| title_short | Implants Survival Rate in Regenerated Sites with Innovative Graft Biomaterials: 1 Year Follow-Up |
| title_sort | implants survival rate in regenerated sites with innovative graft biomaterials 1 year follow up |
| topic | alveolar socket preservation dental implants dental implants survival rate peri-implant bone loss bone grafts guided bone regeneration |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/14/18/5292 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT eliominetti implantssurvivalrateinregeneratedsiteswithinnovativegraftbiomaterials1yearfollowup AT martincelko implantssurvivalrateinregeneratedsiteswithinnovativegraftbiomaterials1yearfollowup AT marcellocontessi implantssurvivalrateinregeneratedsiteswithinnovativegraftbiomaterials1yearfollowup AT fabriziocarini implantssurvivalrateinregeneratedsiteswithinnovativegraftbiomaterials1yearfollowup AT ugogambardella implantssurvivalrateinregeneratedsiteswithinnovativegraftbiomaterials1yearfollowup AT edoardogiacometti implantssurvivalrateinregeneratedsiteswithinnovativegraftbiomaterials1yearfollowup AT jesussantillana implantssurvivalrateinregeneratedsiteswithinnovativegraftbiomaterials1yearfollowup AT tomasbecacampoy implantssurvivalrateinregeneratedsiteswithinnovativegraftbiomaterials1yearfollowup AT johanneshschmitz implantssurvivalrateinregeneratedsiteswithinnovativegraftbiomaterials1yearfollowup AT maurolibertucci implantssurvivalrateinregeneratedsiteswithinnovativegraftbiomaterials1yearfollowup AT henrykimho implantssurvivalrateinregeneratedsiteswithinnovativegraftbiomaterials1yearfollowup AT simonhaan implantssurvivalrateinregeneratedsiteswithinnovativegraftbiomaterials1yearfollowup AT filibertomastrangelo implantssurvivalrateinregeneratedsiteswithinnovativegraftbiomaterials1yearfollowup |