Cargando…
Composite Alloplastic Biomaterial vs. Autologous Platelet-Rich Fibrin in Ridge Preservation
Aim: The aim of this study was to examine the clinical and histological differences of using a combination of alloplastic beta triphasic calcium phosphate (β-TCP) and a cross-linked collagen membrane versus autologous platelet-rich fibrin (PRF-L) in ridge preservation after dental extraction. Materi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6406621/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30744095 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm8020223 |
_version_ | 1783401356100370432 |
---|---|
author | Mendoza-Azpur, Gerardo Olaechea, Allinson Padial-Molina, Miguel Gutiérrez-Garrido, Lourdes O’Valle, Francisco Mesa, Francisco Galindo-Moreno, Pablo |
author_facet | Mendoza-Azpur, Gerardo Olaechea, Allinson Padial-Molina, Miguel Gutiérrez-Garrido, Lourdes O’Valle, Francisco Mesa, Francisco Galindo-Moreno, Pablo |
author_sort | Mendoza-Azpur, Gerardo |
collection | PubMed |
description | Aim: The aim of this study was to examine the clinical and histological differences of using a combination of alloplastic beta triphasic calcium phosphate (β-TCP) and a cross-linked collagen membrane versus autologous platelet-rich fibrin (PRF-L) in ridge preservation after dental extraction. Material and methods: Fifty-one patients were included in this observational case-series study. Dental extractions were performed, after which 25 patients were grafted with β-TCP and 26 with PRF-L. After four months of healing, clinical, radiological, histomorphometric and histological evaluations were performed. Results: A significantly higher percentage of mineralized tissue was observed in samples from the PRF-L grafted areas. Cellularity was higher in PRF-L grafted areas (osteocytes in newly formed bone per mm(2) = 123.25 (5.12) vs. 84.02 (26.53) for PRF-L and β-TCP, respectively, p = 0.01). However, sockets grafted with PRF-L showed a higher reduction in the bucco-lingual dimension after four months of healing (2.19 (0.80) vs. 1.16 (0.55) mm, p < 0.001), as well as a higher alteration in the final position of the mid muco-gingival junction (1.73 (1.34) vs. 0.88 (0.88) mm, p < 0.01). Conclusion: PRF-L concentrate accelerates wound healing in post-extraction sockets in terms of new mineralized tissue component. However, the use of β-TCP biomaterial appears to be superior to maintain bucco-lingual volume and the final position of the muco-gingival junction. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6406621 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-64066212019-03-22 Composite Alloplastic Biomaterial vs. Autologous Platelet-Rich Fibrin in Ridge Preservation Mendoza-Azpur, Gerardo Olaechea, Allinson Padial-Molina, Miguel Gutiérrez-Garrido, Lourdes O’Valle, Francisco Mesa, Francisco Galindo-Moreno, Pablo J Clin Med Article Aim: The aim of this study was to examine the clinical and histological differences of using a combination of alloplastic beta triphasic calcium phosphate (β-TCP) and a cross-linked collagen membrane versus autologous platelet-rich fibrin (PRF-L) in ridge preservation after dental extraction. Material and methods: Fifty-one patients were included in this observational case-series study. Dental extractions were performed, after which 25 patients were grafted with β-TCP and 26 with PRF-L. After four months of healing, clinical, radiological, histomorphometric and histological evaluations were performed. Results: A significantly higher percentage of mineralized tissue was observed in samples from the PRF-L grafted areas. Cellularity was higher in PRF-L grafted areas (osteocytes in newly formed bone per mm(2) = 123.25 (5.12) vs. 84.02 (26.53) for PRF-L and β-TCP, respectively, p = 0.01). However, sockets grafted with PRF-L showed a higher reduction in the bucco-lingual dimension after four months of healing (2.19 (0.80) vs. 1.16 (0.55) mm, p < 0.001), as well as a higher alteration in the final position of the mid muco-gingival junction (1.73 (1.34) vs. 0.88 (0.88) mm, p < 0.01). Conclusion: PRF-L concentrate accelerates wound healing in post-extraction sockets in terms of new mineralized tissue component. However, the use of β-TCP biomaterial appears to be superior to maintain bucco-lingual volume and the final position of the muco-gingival junction. MDPI 2019-02-09 /pmc/articles/PMC6406621/ /pubmed/30744095 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm8020223 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 Mendoza-Azpur, Gerardo Olaechea, Allinson Padial-Molina, Miguel Gutiérrez-Garrido, Lourdes O’Valle, Francisco Mesa, Francisco Galindo-Moreno, Pablo Composite Alloplastic Biomaterial vs. Autologous Platelet-Rich Fibrin in Ridge Preservation |
title | Composite Alloplastic Biomaterial vs. Autologous Platelet-Rich Fibrin in Ridge Preservation |
title_full | Composite Alloplastic Biomaterial vs. Autologous Platelet-Rich Fibrin in Ridge Preservation |
title_fullStr | Composite Alloplastic Biomaterial vs. Autologous Platelet-Rich Fibrin in Ridge Preservation |
title_full_unstemmed | Composite Alloplastic Biomaterial vs. Autologous Platelet-Rich Fibrin in Ridge Preservation |
title_short | Composite Alloplastic Biomaterial vs. Autologous Platelet-Rich Fibrin in Ridge Preservation |
title_sort | composite alloplastic biomaterial vs. autologous platelet-rich fibrin in ridge preservation |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6406621/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30744095 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm8020223 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mendozaazpurgerardo compositealloplasticbiomaterialvsautologousplateletrichfibrininridgepreservation AT olaecheaallinson compositealloplasticbiomaterialvsautologousplateletrichfibrininridgepreservation AT padialmolinamiguel compositealloplasticbiomaterialvsautologousplateletrichfibrininridgepreservation AT gutierrezgarridolourdes compositealloplasticbiomaterialvsautologousplateletrichfibrininridgepreservation AT ovallefrancisco compositealloplasticbiomaterialvsautologousplateletrichfibrininridgepreservation AT mesafrancisco compositealloplasticbiomaterialvsautologousplateletrichfibrininridgepreservation AT galindomorenopablo compositealloplasticbiomaterialvsautologousplateletrichfibrininridgepreservation |