4.6 Article

Autologous Dentin Graft after Impacted Mandibular Third Molar Extraction to Prevent Periodontal Pocket Formation-A Split-Mouth Pilot Study

期刊

MATERIALS
卷 15, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ma15041431

关键词

impacted lower third molar; autologous dentin graft; periodontal defect; third molar surgery

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This preliminary study suggests that autologous dentin grafts can be effective in preventing periodontal defects after surgical extraction of impacted or semi-impacted lower third molars. The results show a reduction in probing pocket depth and an increase in bone gain with the use of autologous dentin grafts.
This preliminary study aims to evaluate the efficacy of an autologous dentin graft in preventing periodontal defects after impacted or semi-impacted lower third molars' (M3) surgical extraction. For this purpose, radiographic and periodontal evaluation of post-extractive sockets were performed. Ten patients were enrolled in the study: twenty M3 extraction sockets were treated with a split-mouth modality. After tooth extraction, the experimental sites were filled with autologous dentin graft obtained by the extracted M3, while the control sites were filled with blood clot alone. Flaps were closed by first intention to ensure the stability of the wounds. Post-extractive sites were monitored at days 15, 90 and 180. The healing was not affected by any complications associated with the use of the autologous dentine graft in all cases. The measurements recorded at six months showed a reduction of the probing pocket depth distal to the second lower molar (M2) at both surgical sites, with a greater reduction observed at the experimental sites. Radiographic evaluation also showed a greater amount of bone gain at the grafted sites compared to the control sites. The results of this preliminary study suggest that autologous dentin grafts can be useful in preventing the formation of periodontal defects distal to M2 after M3 surgical extraction.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据