Ridge Preservation Comparing a Nonresorbable PTFE Membrane to a Resorbable Collagen Membrane: A Clinical and Histologic Study in Humans

被引:21
作者
Arbab, Hussain [1 ]
Greenwell, Henry [2 ]
Hill, Margaret [3 ]
Morton, Dean [4 ]
Vidal, Ricardo [5 ]
Shumway, Brian [6 ]
Allan, Nicholas D.
机构
[1] Univ Louisville, Sch Dent, Dept Periodont, Louisville, KY 40202 USA
[2] Univ Louisville, Dept Periodont, Grad Periodont, Louisville, KY 40202 USA
[3] Univ Louisville, Postdoctoral Educ, Louisville, KY 40202 USA
[4] Univ Louisville, Dept Oral Hlth & Rehabil, Louisville, KY 40202 USA
[5] Univ Louisville, Dept Periodont, Louisville, KY 40202 USA
[6] Univ Louisville, Dept Oral Pathol, Louisville, KY 40202 USA
关键词
cancellous allograft; xenograft; facial overlay graft; guided bone regeneration; DRIED BONE ALLOGRAFT; BOVINE-DERIVED XENOGRAFT; IMPLANT SITE DEVELOPMENT; BINDING PEPTIDE P-15; ALVEOLAR RIDGE; TOOTH EXTRACTION; DERMAL MATRIX; GRAFT; SOCKET; AUGMENTATION;
D O I
10.1097/ID.0000000000000370
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Purpose: The primary aim of this randomized, controlled, blinded clinical trial was to compare the effect of a resorbable collagen membrane (CM group) versus a nonresorbable high-density polytetrafluoroethylene membrane (PTFE group) on the clinical and histologic outcomes of a ridge preservation procedure. Materials and Methods: All 24 sites received an intrasocket cancellous allograft and a buccal overlay bovine derived xenograft. Results: The change in horizontal crestal ridge width was -1.4 +/- 1.2 mm for the CM group, whereas the PTFE group lost -2.2 +/- 1.5 mm, which was not statistically significant between groups (P > 0.05). Vertical ridge height change was -1.2 +/- 1.5 for the CM group, whereas the PTFE group lost -0.5 +/- 1.6, which was not significantly different between groups (P > 0.05). The percent vital bone was similar and not significantly different between groups. Primary closure was not obtained and the exposed membrane portion over the socket opening healed with keratinized tissue. Conclusion: The choice of a resorbable versus a nonresorbable barrier membrane did not affect the clinical or the histologic outcome of ridge preservation treatment.
引用
收藏
页码:128 / 134
页数:7
相关论文
共 37 条
[1]  
Al-Sabbagh Mohanad, 2013, J Int Acad Periodontol, V15, P91
[2]  
Barone A, 2008, J PERIODONTOL, V79, P1370, DOI [10.1902/jop.2008.070628, 10.1902/jop.2008.070628 ]
[3]   Histologic Analysis of Healing After Tooth Extraction With Ridge Preservation Using Mineralized Human Bone Allograft [J].
Beck, Tina M. ;
Mealey, Brian L. .
JOURNAL OF PERIODONTOLOGY, 2010, 81 (12) :1765-1772
[4]  
BERNIMOULIN J-P, 1975, Journal of Clinical Periodontology, V2, P1, DOI 10.1111/j.1600-051X.1975.tb01721.x
[5]  
Brkovic BMB, 2008, J CAN DENT ASSOC, V74, P523
[6]   Ridge Preservation With or Without an Osteoinductive Allograft: A Clinical, Radiographic, Micro-Computed Tomography, and Histologic Study Evaluating Dimensional Changes and New Bone Formation of the Alveolar Ridge [J].
Brownfield, Lauren A. ;
Weltman, Robin L. .
JOURNAL OF PERIODONTOLOGY, 2012, 83 (05) :581-589
[7]  
BURCHARDT H, 1983, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P28
[8]   Influence of bioactive glass on changes in alveolar process dimensions after exodontia [J].
Camargo, PM ;
Lekovic, V ;
Weinlaender, M ;
Klokkevold, PR ;
Kenney, EB ;
Dimitrijevic, B ;
Nedic, M ;
Jancovic, S ;
Orsini, M .
ORAL SURGERY ORAL MEDICINE ORAL PATHOLOGY ORAL RADIOLOGY AND ENDODONTOLOGY, 2000, 90 (05) :581-586
[9]  
Cardaropoli D, 2008, INT J PERIODONT REST, V28, P469
[10]   Histologic Comparison of Healing Following Tooth Extraction With Ridge Preservation Using Two Different Xenograft Protocols [J].
Cook, Deana Clare ;
Mealey, Brian L. .
JOURNAL OF PERIODONTOLOGY, 2013, 84 (05) :585-594