Cargando…

Comparative Study between a Novel In Vivo Method and CBCT for Assessment of Ridge Alterations after Socket Preservation—Pilot Study

The aim of this study was to compare two different methods for evaluation of alveolar bone resorption after the socket preservation procedure. In the current study, 9 patients with a total of nine teeth indicated for extraction were included. Patients received alveolar ridge preservation with allogr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ivanova, Vasilena, Chenchev, Ivan, Zlatev, Stefan, Iordanov, Georgi, Mijiritsky, Eitan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6339037/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30621257
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16010127
_version_ 1783388545312882688
author Ivanova, Vasilena
Chenchev, Ivan
Zlatev, Stefan
Iordanov, Georgi
Mijiritsky, Eitan
author_facet Ivanova, Vasilena
Chenchev, Ivan
Zlatev, Stefan
Iordanov, Georgi
Mijiritsky, Eitan
author_sort Ivanova, Vasilena
collection PubMed
description The aim of this study was to compare two different methods for evaluation of alveolar bone resorption after the socket preservation procedure. In the current study, 9 patients with a total of nine teeth indicated for extraction were included. Patients received alveolar ridge preservation with allograft (BoneAlbumin™, OrthoSera Dental, Gyor, Hungary) or Platelet-Rich fibrin (PRF). CBCT (Planmeca ProMax 3D, Helsinki, Finland), was taken at 1 week and 4 months after the socket preservation procedure. A 3D scan, obtained with Trios (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) of the alveolar bone of the surgical site and the adjacent teeth at the place of extraction was performed during the surgical procedure, immediately after the graft placement in the alveolar socket, and after 4 months. Virtual study models were generated using the three-dimensional file processing software “Meshlab” (ISTI—CNR Rome Italy). The changes of alveolar height and width were measured and analyzed. Results were taken from both methods. Radiographic examination revealed that the average value of horizontal resorption is 0.6–2.4 mm, and vertical resorption is 0.46–2.8 mm. On virtual models, the average value for horizontal resorption is 1.92–3.64 mm, the vertical resorption value is 0.95–2.10 mm. The Trios intraoral scan can provide non-invasive and more accurate quantitative insights into the dimensional changes in the alveolar ridge after the bone remodeling process. More research is needed for verification of these results.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6339037
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63390372019-01-23 Comparative Study between a Novel In Vivo Method and CBCT for Assessment of Ridge Alterations after Socket Preservation—Pilot Study Ivanova, Vasilena Chenchev, Ivan Zlatev, Stefan Iordanov, Georgi Mijiritsky, Eitan Int J Environ Res Public Health Article The aim of this study was to compare two different methods for evaluation of alveolar bone resorption after the socket preservation procedure. In the current study, 9 patients with a total of nine teeth indicated for extraction were included. Patients received alveolar ridge preservation with allograft (BoneAlbumin™, OrthoSera Dental, Gyor, Hungary) or Platelet-Rich fibrin (PRF). CBCT (Planmeca ProMax 3D, Helsinki, Finland), was taken at 1 week and 4 months after the socket preservation procedure. A 3D scan, obtained with Trios (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) of the alveolar bone of the surgical site and the adjacent teeth at the place of extraction was performed during the surgical procedure, immediately after the graft placement in the alveolar socket, and after 4 months. Virtual study models were generated using the three-dimensional file processing software “Meshlab” (ISTI—CNR Rome Italy). The changes of alveolar height and width were measured and analyzed. Results were taken from both methods. Radiographic examination revealed that the average value of horizontal resorption is 0.6–2.4 mm, and vertical resorption is 0.46–2.8 mm. On virtual models, the average value for horizontal resorption is 1.92–3.64 mm, the vertical resorption value is 0.95–2.10 mm. The Trios intraoral scan can provide non-invasive and more accurate quantitative insights into the dimensional changes in the alveolar ridge after the bone remodeling process. More research is needed for verification of these results. MDPI 2019-01-05 2019-01 /pmc/articles/PMC6339037/ /pubmed/30621257 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16010127 Text en © 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Ivanova, Vasilena
Chenchev, Ivan
Zlatev, Stefan
Iordanov, Georgi
Mijiritsky, Eitan
Comparative Study between a Novel In Vivo Method and CBCT for Assessment of Ridge Alterations after Socket Preservation—Pilot Study
title Comparative Study between a Novel In Vivo Method and CBCT for Assessment of Ridge Alterations after Socket Preservation—Pilot Study
title_full Comparative Study between a Novel In Vivo Method and CBCT for Assessment of Ridge Alterations after Socket Preservation—Pilot Study
title_fullStr Comparative Study between a Novel In Vivo Method and CBCT for Assessment of Ridge Alterations after Socket Preservation—Pilot Study
title_full_unstemmed Comparative Study between a Novel In Vivo Method and CBCT for Assessment of Ridge Alterations after Socket Preservation—Pilot Study
title_short Comparative Study between a Novel In Vivo Method and CBCT for Assessment of Ridge Alterations after Socket Preservation—Pilot Study
title_sort comparative study between a novel in vivo method and cbct for assessment of ridge alterations after socket preservation—pilot study
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6339037/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30621257
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16010127
work_keys_str_mv AT ivanovavasilena comparativestudybetweenanovelinvivomethodandcbctforassessmentofridgealterationsaftersocketpreservationpilotstudy
AT chenchevivan comparativestudybetweenanovelinvivomethodandcbctforassessmentofridgealterationsaftersocketpreservationpilotstudy
AT zlatevstefan comparativestudybetweenanovelinvivomethodandcbctforassessmentofridgealterationsaftersocketpreservationpilotstudy
AT iordanovgeorgi comparativestudybetweenanovelinvivomethodandcbctforassessmentofridgealterationsaftersocketpreservationpilotstudy
AT mijiritskyeitan comparativestudybetweenanovelinvivomethodandcbctforassessmentofridgealterationsaftersocketpreservationpilotstudy