Efficacy of different forms of concentrated growth factors combined with deproteinized bovine bone minerals in guided bone regeneration: a randomized clinical trial

被引:0
|
作者
Lingshan Zhu [1 ]
Xichen Du [2 ]
Gang Fu [3 ]
Li Wang [1 ]
Hong Huang [2 ]
Xiaohong Wu [1 ]
Binting Xu [2 ]
机构
[1] College of Stomatology, Chongqing Medical University, 426# Songshi North Road, Chongqing
[2] Chongqing Municipal Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedical Engineering of Higher Education, Chongqing
[3] Mianyang Hospital of T.C.M, Mianyang
关键词
Concentrated growth factors; Dental implants; Guided bone regeneration; Postoperative adverse reaction;
D O I
10.1186/s12903-025-05698-9
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Objectives: To explore the bone regeneration effect of different forms of concentrated growth factor (CGF) when combined with deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) for simultaneous implant-guided bone regeneration (GBR) and its impact on postoperative adverse reactions. Methods: Fifty-seven patients who underwent simultaneous implant GBR were selected for the study and divided into three groups. The study involved three groups: the gel phase concentrated growth factor (GPCGF) group, which used GPCGF-DBBM mixture; the liquid phase concentrated growth factor (LPCGF) group, which used LPCGF-DBBM mixture; and the control group, which used DBBM alone. The thickness of the buccal lateral bones was measured using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), and patients were asked to complete questionnaires to assess primary adverse reactions during the first week after surgery. The data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA, Tukey test, and Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: The buccal lateral bone thickness in the GPCGF, LPCGF, and control groups decreased significantly at 6 months post-surgery compared to immediately after surgery. The change of bone thickness in the GPCGF group was lower than that in the control group (p < 0.01), and that in the LPCGF group did not differ from that in the control group (p > 0.05). During the postoperative week, statistically significant differences could be observed in bleeding, mouth opening, chewing, sleeping, speaking, daily routine, and pain (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Compared to the DBBM applied alone, the GPCGF-DBBM mixture has more positive implications for reducing bone resorption, promoting bone reconstruction and relieving certain postoperative adverse effects in dental implants with simultaneous GBR. The GPCGF-DBBM mixture was superior to the LPCGF-DBBM mixture in alleviating adverse effects in terms of bleeding and speaking after GBR. Clinical trials registration number: The Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, NO. ChiCTR2300070107 (03/04/2023). © The Author(s) 2025.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Efficacy of concentrated growth factors combined with mineralized collagen on quality of life and bone reconstruction of guided bone regeneration
    Dai, Yan
    Han, Xiao-Hui
    Hu, Li-Hua
    Wu, Hai-Wei
    Huang, Sheng-Yun
    Lu, Yu-Peng
    REGENERATIVE BIOMATERIALS, 2020, 7 (03) : 313 - 320
  • [2] Concentrated Growth Factors (CGF) Combined with Melatonin in Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR): A Case Report
    Leonida, Alessandro
    Favero, Gaia
    Caccianiga, Paolo
    Ceraulo, Saverio
    Rodella, Luigi Fabrizio
    Rezzani, Rita
    Caccianiga, Gianluigi
    DIAGNOSTICS, 2022, 12 (05)
  • [3] The Use of Growth Factors for Guided Bone Regeneration in Clinical Periodontics
    Sehgal H.S.
    Hokett S.D.
    Katancik J.A.
    Current Oral Health Reports, 2019, 6 (4) : 244 - 249
  • [4] The clinical use of deproteinized bovine bone mineral on bone regeneration in conjunction with immediate implant installation
    van Steenberghe, D
    Callens, A
    Geers, L
    Jacobs, R
    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2000, 11 (03) : 210 - 216
  • [5] Alveolar ridge preservation with guided bone regeneration and a synthetic bone substitute or a bovine-derived xenograft: a randomized, controlled clinical trial
    Mardas, Nikos
    Chadha, Vivek
    Donos, Nikolaos
    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2010, 21 (07) : 688 - 698
  • [6] Guided bone regeneration at dehiscence comparing synthetic bone substitute versus bovine bone mineral: A multicenter, noninferiority, randomized trial
    Cha, Jae-Kook
    Jung, Ui-Won
    Montero-Solis, Eduardo
    Sanz-Sanchez, Ignacio
    Sanz-Alonso, Mariano
    CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2024, : 1233 - 1244
  • [7] Experimental and clinical evaluation of BMP2-CPC graft versus deproteinized bovine bone graft for guided bone regeneration: A pilot study
    Shen, Hongzhou
    Zhi, Yin
    Zhu, Fangxing
    Si, Jiawen
    Shi, Jun
    Shen, Steve G. F.
    DENTAL MATERIALS JOURNAL, 2021, 40 (01) : 191 - 201
  • [8] Efficacy of local hyaluronidase administration in guided bone regeneration surgery: a randomized controlled trial
    Kwoen, Min-Jeong
    Choi, Yong-Hoon
    Kim, Keun-Suh
    Chang, Na-Hee
    Kim, Young-Kyun
    Lee, Hyo-Jung
    JOURNAL OF THE KOREAN ASSOCIATION OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGEONS, 2021, 47 (02) : 91 - 98
  • [9] Histological and radiological outcome after horizontal guided bone regeneration with bovine bone mineral alone or in combination with bone in edentulous atrophic maxilla: A randomized controlled trial
    Aludden, Hanna
    Starch-Jensen, Thomas
    Dahlin, Christer
    Sdik, Joana
    Cederlund, Andreas
    Mordenfeld, Arne
    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2024, 35 (04) : 396 - 406
  • [10] Two Stage Sinus Lifting Using Nanohydroxyapatite Particles Versus Deproteinized Bovine Bone: Randomized Clinical Trial
    Nour, Mahmoud
    Shawky, Mohamed
    Abaas, Rofaida A.
    Hakam, Maha
    Atef, Mohammed
    CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2025, 27 (01)