Cargando…

Radiographic comparison of atelocollagen versus deproteinized bovine bone minerals covered with a collagen membrane in alveolar ridge preservation: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND: Atelocollagen (AC) is a low-immunogenic collagen derivative with longer degradation time, which can be a suitable material for alveolar ridge preservation (ARP). However, there are few human studies on AC using for ARP. This research aims to radiographically evaluate the efficacy of AC i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: You, Sha, Yu, Fan, Fan, Qihang, Xia, Ting, Liang, Liang, Yan, Qi, Zeng, Hao, Shi, Bin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10662564/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37990178
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-03647-y
_version_ 1785148563924189184
author You, Sha
Yu, Fan
Fan, Qihang
Xia, Ting
Liang, Liang
Yan, Qi
Zeng, Hao
Shi, Bin
author_facet You, Sha
Yu, Fan
Fan, Qihang
Xia, Ting
Liang, Liang
Yan, Qi
Zeng, Hao
Shi, Bin
author_sort You, Sha
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Atelocollagen (AC) is a low-immunogenic collagen derivative with longer degradation time, which can be a suitable material for alveolar ridge preservation (ARP). However, there are few human studies on AC using for ARP. This research aims to radiographically evaluate the efficacy of AC in comparison to deproteinized bovine bone minerals covered with a collagen membrane (DBBM/CM) in ARP. METHODS: Medical records in the Implantology Department of the Hospital of Stomatology of Wuhan University were screened for patients who received flapless ARP using either AC or DBBM/CM. A total of 58 patients were included in this retrospective study. 28 patients were treated with AC, while 30 patients were used DBBM/CM. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were taken before extraction and after 6 months of healing. To assess the dimensional change of the extraction sockets, the scanning data were output and transferred to the digital software to measure horizontal bone width change, vertical bone height change and bone volume change in region of interest. To evaluate the bone quality of healed sockets, the bone density of virtual implants was evaluated. RESULTS: The horizontal bone width changes at all five different levels showed no significant difference between the two groups. The largest horizontal bone width decrement in both groups occurred at the crest of ridge, which decreased 3.71 ± 1.67 mm in AC group and 3.53 ± 1.51 mm in DBBM/CM group (p = 0.68). At the central buccal aspect, the ridge height reduced 0.10 ± 1.30 mm in AC group, while increased 0.77 ± 2.43 mm in DBBM/CM group (p = 0.10). The vertical bone height differences between two groups showed no statistical significance. The percentages of volume absorption in AC group and DBBM/CM group were 12.37%±6.09% and 14.54%±11.21%, respectively. No significant difference in volume absorption was found (p = 0.36). The average bone density around virtual implants in AC group (649.41 ± 184.71 HU) was significantly lower than that in DBBM/CM group (985.23 ± 207.85 HU) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: ARP with AC had a similar effect on limiting the dimensional alteration of alveolar ridge, when radiographically compared with DBBM/CM. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12903-023-03647-y.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10662564
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106625642023-11-21 Radiographic comparison of atelocollagen versus deproteinized bovine bone minerals covered with a collagen membrane in alveolar ridge preservation: a retrospective study You, Sha Yu, Fan Fan, Qihang Xia, Ting Liang, Liang Yan, Qi Zeng, Hao Shi, Bin BMC Oral Health Research BACKGROUND: Atelocollagen (AC) is a low-immunogenic collagen derivative with longer degradation time, which can be a suitable material for alveolar ridge preservation (ARP). However, there are few human studies on AC using for ARP. This research aims to radiographically evaluate the efficacy of AC in comparison to deproteinized bovine bone minerals covered with a collagen membrane (DBBM/CM) in ARP. METHODS: Medical records in the Implantology Department of the Hospital of Stomatology of Wuhan University were screened for patients who received flapless ARP using either AC or DBBM/CM. A total of 58 patients were included in this retrospective study. 28 patients were treated with AC, while 30 patients were used DBBM/CM. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were taken before extraction and after 6 months of healing. To assess the dimensional change of the extraction sockets, the scanning data were output and transferred to the digital software to measure horizontal bone width change, vertical bone height change and bone volume change in region of interest. To evaluate the bone quality of healed sockets, the bone density of virtual implants was evaluated. RESULTS: The horizontal bone width changes at all five different levels showed no significant difference between the two groups. The largest horizontal bone width decrement in both groups occurred at the crest of ridge, which decreased 3.71 ± 1.67 mm in AC group and 3.53 ± 1.51 mm in DBBM/CM group (p = 0.68). At the central buccal aspect, the ridge height reduced 0.10 ± 1.30 mm in AC group, while increased 0.77 ± 2.43 mm in DBBM/CM group (p = 0.10). The vertical bone height differences between two groups showed no statistical significance. The percentages of volume absorption in AC group and DBBM/CM group were 12.37%±6.09% and 14.54%±11.21%, respectively. No significant difference in volume absorption was found (p = 0.36). The average bone density around virtual implants in AC group (649.41 ± 184.71 HU) was significantly lower than that in DBBM/CM group (985.23 ± 207.85 HU) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: ARP with AC had a similar effect on limiting the dimensional alteration of alveolar ridge, when radiographically compared with DBBM/CM. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12903-023-03647-y. BioMed Central 2023-11-21 /pmc/articles/PMC10662564/ /pubmed/37990178 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-03647-y Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
You, Sha
Yu, Fan
Fan, Qihang
Xia, Ting
Liang, Liang
Yan, Qi
Zeng, Hao
Shi, Bin
Radiographic comparison of atelocollagen versus deproteinized bovine bone minerals covered with a collagen membrane in alveolar ridge preservation: a retrospective study
title Radiographic comparison of atelocollagen versus deproteinized bovine bone minerals covered with a collagen membrane in alveolar ridge preservation: a retrospective study
title_full Radiographic comparison of atelocollagen versus deproteinized bovine bone minerals covered with a collagen membrane in alveolar ridge preservation: a retrospective study
title_fullStr Radiographic comparison of atelocollagen versus deproteinized bovine bone minerals covered with a collagen membrane in alveolar ridge preservation: a retrospective study
title_full_unstemmed Radiographic comparison of atelocollagen versus deproteinized bovine bone minerals covered with a collagen membrane in alveolar ridge preservation: a retrospective study
title_short Radiographic comparison of atelocollagen versus deproteinized bovine bone minerals covered with a collagen membrane in alveolar ridge preservation: a retrospective study
title_sort radiographic comparison of atelocollagen versus deproteinized bovine bone minerals covered with a collagen membrane in alveolar ridge preservation: a retrospective study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10662564/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37990178
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-03647-y
work_keys_str_mv AT yousha radiographiccomparisonofatelocollagenversusdeproteinizedbovinebonemineralscoveredwithacollagenmembraneinalveolarridgepreservationaretrospectivestudy
AT yufan radiographiccomparisonofatelocollagenversusdeproteinizedbovinebonemineralscoveredwithacollagenmembraneinalveolarridgepreservationaretrospectivestudy
AT fanqihang radiographiccomparisonofatelocollagenversusdeproteinizedbovinebonemineralscoveredwithacollagenmembraneinalveolarridgepreservationaretrospectivestudy
AT xiating radiographiccomparisonofatelocollagenversusdeproteinizedbovinebonemineralscoveredwithacollagenmembraneinalveolarridgepreservationaretrospectivestudy
AT liangliang radiographiccomparisonofatelocollagenversusdeproteinizedbovinebonemineralscoveredwithacollagenmembraneinalveolarridgepreservationaretrospectivestudy
AT yanqi radiographiccomparisonofatelocollagenversusdeproteinizedbovinebonemineralscoveredwithacollagenmembraneinalveolarridgepreservationaretrospectivestudy
AT zenghao radiographiccomparisonofatelocollagenversusdeproteinizedbovinebonemineralscoveredwithacollagenmembraneinalveolarridgepreservationaretrospectivestudy
AT shibin radiographiccomparisonofatelocollagenversusdeproteinizedbovinebonemineralscoveredwithacollagenmembraneinalveolarridgepreservationaretrospectivestudy