Morphometric Changes of the Socket after Site Preservation Using Nanobone and Collagen Membrane or Stypro Versus Extraction Alone

Statement of Problem: The long-term success of a dental implant relies on implant osseointegration into native and viable bone, implant placement in an ideal position, and optimal hard and soft tissue contour. This requires the presence of sufficient alveolar bone volume, good alveolar ridge (Pra...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Salahi S, Etemadifar R, Moosaali F
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Shiraz University of Medical Sciences 2015-06-01
Series:Journal of Dental Biomaterial
Subjects:
Online Access:http://jdb.sums.ac.ir/index.php/jdb/article/viewFile/101/31
_version_ 1811253054464327680
author Salahi S
Etemadifar R
Moosaali F
author_facet Salahi S
Etemadifar R
Moosaali F
author_sort Salahi S
collection DOAJ
description Statement of Problem: The long-term success of a dental implant relies on implant osseointegration into native and viable bone, implant placement in an ideal position, and optimal hard and soft tissue contour. This requires the presence of sufficient alveolar bone volume, good alveolar ridge (Practically with no sign of atrophy) and good surgical technique. Objectives: The aim of this randomized controlled clinical study was to evaluate morphometric changes after different alveolar ridge preservation procedures. Materials and Methods: In this study, 33 patients who had single-rooted premolar, which needed to be extracted, were recruited. Patients were randomly divided into 3 groups and after tooth extraction the following treatments were administered: in group A: NanoBone and a collagen membrane; in group B: NanoBone and Stypro; and in group C: natural healing. The following clinical parameters were evaluated at baseline and 6 months after the extraction: buccolingual width, midbuccal height (with the use of a custom made stent) and width of keratinized gingiva. For data analysis, Paired t-test,one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s tests were used. Results: The average reduction in the buccolingual width, midbuccal height and keratinized gingiva was as follows: group A: 1.18±0.6, 0.64±0.92 and 3.45±1.75 mm; group B: 2.18±0.75, 0.73±0.78 and 4.73±0.9 mm; and group C: 1±0.89, 2.36±1.21 and 5±0.63 mm, respectively. Moreover, a significantly reduced resorption was found in both the buccolingual width and the width of keratinized gingiva in group A as compared to groups B and C (p<0.05). Conclusions: This study showed that the use of collagen membrane+Nano bone (group A) can significantly reduce the horizontal resorption of the alveolar ridge and keratinized tissue more effectively than stypro+Nano bone (group B ) and blood clot alone and natural healing (group C).
first_indexed 2024-04-12T16:44:00Z
format Article
id doaj.art-2d803b6989e5473cbb54358ea1e93f91
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2383-3971
2383-398X
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-12T16:44:00Z
publishDate 2015-06-01
publisher Shiraz University of Medical Sciences
record_format Article
series Journal of Dental Biomaterial
spelling doaj.art-2d803b6989e5473cbb54358ea1e93f912022-12-22T03:24:38ZengShiraz University of Medical SciencesJournal of Dental Biomaterial2383-39712383-398X2015-06-0122Morphometric Changes of the Socket after Site Preservation Using Nanobone and Collagen Membrane or Stypro Versus Extraction AloneSalahi S0Etemadifar R1Moosaali F2Department of Periodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran.Department of Periodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Bandar Abbas University of Medical Sciences, Hormozgan, IranDepartment of Periodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran.Statement of Problem: The long-term success of a dental implant relies on implant osseointegration into native and viable bone, implant placement in an ideal position, and optimal hard and soft tissue contour. This requires the presence of sufficient alveolar bone volume, good alveolar ridge (Practically with no sign of atrophy) and good surgical technique. Objectives: The aim of this randomized controlled clinical study was to evaluate morphometric changes after different alveolar ridge preservation procedures. Materials and Methods: In this study, 33 patients who had single-rooted premolar, which needed to be extracted, were recruited. Patients were randomly divided into 3 groups and after tooth extraction the following treatments were administered: in group A: NanoBone and a collagen membrane; in group B: NanoBone and Stypro; and in group C: natural healing. The following clinical parameters were evaluated at baseline and 6 months after the extraction: buccolingual width, midbuccal height (with the use of a custom made stent) and width of keratinized gingiva. For data analysis, Paired t-test,one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s tests were used. Results: The average reduction in the buccolingual width, midbuccal height and keratinized gingiva was as follows: group A: 1.18±0.6, 0.64±0.92 and 3.45±1.75 mm; group B: 2.18±0.75, 0.73±0.78 and 4.73±0.9 mm; and group C: 1±0.89, 2.36±1.21 and 5±0.63 mm, respectively. Moreover, a significantly reduced resorption was found in both the buccolingual width and the width of keratinized gingiva in group A as compared to groups B and C (p<0.05). Conclusions: This study showed that the use of collagen membrane+Nano bone (group A) can significantly reduce the horizontal resorption of the alveolar ridge and keratinized tissue more effectively than stypro+Nano bone (group B ) and blood clot alone and natural healing (group C).http://jdb.sums.ac.ir/index.php/jdb/article/viewFile/101/31Socket preservationNanoBoneStyproCollagen membrane
spellingShingle Salahi S
Etemadifar R
Moosaali F
Morphometric Changes of the Socket after Site Preservation Using Nanobone and Collagen Membrane or Stypro Versus Extraction Alone
Journal of Dental Biomaterial
Socket preservation
NanoBone
Stypro
Collagen membrane
title Morphometric Changes of the Socket after Site Preservation Using Nanobone and Collagen Membrane or Stypro Versus Extraction Alone
title_full Morphometric Changes of the Socket after Site Preservation Using Nanobone and Collagen Membrane or Stypro Versus Extraction Alone
title_fullStr Morphometric Changes of the Socket after Site Preservation Using Nanobone and Collagen Membrane or Stypro Versus Extraction Alone
title_full_unstemmed Morphometric Changes of the Socket after Site Preservation Using Nanobone and Collagen Membrane or Stypro Versus Extraction Alone
title_short Morphometric Changes of the Socket after Site Preservation Using Nanobone and Collagen Membrane or Stypro Versus Extraction Alone
title_sort morphometric changes of the socket after site preservation using nanobone and collagen membrane or stypro versus extraction alone
topic Socket preservation
NanoBone
Stypro
Collagen membrane
url http://jdb.sums.ac.ir/index.php/jdb/article/viewFile/101/31
work_keys_str_mv AT salahis morphometricchangesofthesocketaftersitepreservationusingnanoboneandcollagenmembraneorstyproversusextractionalone
AT etemadifarr morphometricchangesofthesocketaftersitepreservationusingnanoboneandcollagenmembraneorstyproversusextractionalone
AT moosaalif morphometricchangesofthesocketaftersitepreservationusingnanoboneandcollagenmembraneorstyproversusextractionalone