4.6 Article

Socket Preservation Using Dentin Mixed with Xenograft Materials: A Pilot Study

Journal

MATERIALS
Volume 16, Issue 14, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ma16144945

Keywords

socket preservation; dentin matrix; xenograft material; autologous tooth graft; biomaterials; oral surgery

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aimed to analyze the use of a mix of two different graft materials in dental implant surgery. Results showed that the mixture of dentin and xenograft materials could effectively promote new bone formation, and the reabsorption rates of the two materials differed, providing options for specific cases.
Background: The use of human dentin matrix could serve as an alternative to autologous, allogenic, and xenogeneic bone grafts due to its osteoinductive characteristics. The limitations of its use is tooth availability and that it is often necessary to mix it with a biomaterial. Aim: The aim of this study was to analyze a mix of two different graft materials with different reabsorption ranges when the dentin graft material was not sufficient for full socket preservation. Methods: Seven socket preservation surgeries were carried out employing a mixed graft material containing 50% dentin and 50% xenograft. After four months of recovery, the implants were positioned. At the time of the prosthesis placement and implant surgery, bone samples were collected. Results: The histologic analysis revealed no inflammatory or infective reaction against the seven biopsies. The histomorphometric graft analysis revealed an amount of New Bone of 29.03 & PLUSMN; 6.57% after 4 months and 34.11 & PLUSMN; 5.02% after 8 months. Conclusions: The two graft materials had a different volume reabsorption rate: 71% after 4 months and 90% after 8 months for dentin, and 6% after 4 months and 26% after 8 months for the xenograft. The space created by the dentin reabsorption increased the quantity of new bone.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available