Cargando…

Socket Preservation Using a (Dense) PTFE Barrier with or without Xenograft Material: A Randomized Clinical Trial

When alveolar preservation procedures are not performed after tooth extraction, aesthetic and functional impairment could occur. Guided bone regeneration using polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) membranes has proven to be a simple alternative treatment that results in good maintenance of the alveolar bo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: de Carvalho Formiga, Márcio, Dayube, Ulisses Ribeiro Campos, Chiapetti, Cristiane Kern, de Rossi Figueiredo, Daniela, Shibli, Jamil Awad
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6766191/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31500375
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma12182902
_version_ 1783454663576649728
author de Carvalho Formiga, Márcio
Dayube, Ulisses Ribeiro Campos
Chiapetti, Cristiane Kern
de Rossi Figueiredo, Daniela
Shibli, Jamil Awad
author_facet de Carvalho Formiga, Márcio
Dayube, Ulisses Ribeiro Campos
Chiapetti, Cristiane Kern
de Rossi Figueiredo, Daniela
Shibli, Jamil Awad
author_sort de Carvalho Formiga, Márcio
collection PubMed
description When alveolar preservation procedures are not performed after tooth extraction, aesthetic and functional impairment could occur. Guided bone regeneration using polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) membranes has proven to be a simple alternative treatment that results in good maintenance of the alveolar bone for mediate/late implant placement. Therefore, this study compared the effect of alveolar preservation with the use of dense PTFE membranes, with and without xenograft material by Computerized tomography-based body composition (CTBC) analysis, after four months of the socket preservation procedure. A total of 29 teeth indicated for extraction. In the test group, the sockets were filled with bone graft biomaterial and subsequently coated with a dense PTFE membrane. In the control group, the sockets were filled with the blood clots and subsequently coated with a dense PTFE membrane. The results we found on the changes of the bone width and height after the procedures were: buccal plate: control group 0.46 mm, test group 0.91 mm; alveolar height: control group −0.41 mm, test group 0.35 mm; cervical third: control group −0.89 mm, test group −0.11 mm; middle third: control group −0.64, test group −0.50; and apical third: control group 0.09 mm, test group −0.14 mm. The use of a xenograft in conjunction with d-PTFE membranes proved to be superior to the use of the same membrane and blood clot only in regions of the crest, middle third, and alveolar height.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6766191
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67661912019-09-30 Socket Preservation Using a (Dense) PTFE Barrier with or without Xenograft Material: A Randomized Clinical Trial de Carvalho Formiga, Márcio Dayube, Ulisses Ribeiro Campos Chiapetti, Cristiane Kern de Rossi Figueiredo, Daniela Shibli, Jamil Awad Materials (Basel) Article When alveolar preservation procedures are not performed after tooth extraction, aesthetic and functional impairment could occur. Guided bone regeneration using polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) membranes has proven to be a simple alternative treatment that results in good maintenance of the alveolar bone for mediate/late implant placement. Therefore, this study compared the effect of alveolar preservation with the use of dense PTFE membranes, with and without xenograft material by Computerized tomography-based body composition (CTBC) analysis, after four months of the socket preservation procedure. A total of 29 teeth indicated for extraction. In the test group, the sockets were filled with bone graft biomaterial and subsequently coated with a dense PTFE membrane. In the control group, the sockets were filled with the blood clots and subsequently coated with a dense PTFE membrane. The results we found on the changes of the bone width and height after the procedures were: buccal plate: control group 0.46 mm, test group 0.91 mm; alveolar height: control group −0.41 mm, test group 0.35 mm; cervical third: control group −0.89 mm, test group −0.11 mm; middle third: control group −0.64, test group −0.50; and apical third: control group 0.09 mm, test group −0.14 mm. The use of a xenograft in conjunction with d-PTFE membranes proved to be superior to the use of the same membrane and blood clot only in regions of the crest, middle third, and alveolar height. MDPI 2019-09-08 /pmc/articles/PMC6766191/ /pubmed/31500375 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma12182902 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
de Carvalho Formiga, Márcio
Dayube, Ulisses Ribeiro Campos
Chiapetti, Cristiane Kern
de Rossi Figueiredo, Daniela
Shibli, Jamil Awad
Socket Preservation Using a (Dense) PTFE Barrier with or without Xenograft Material: A Randomized Clinical Trial
title Socket Preservation Using a (Dense) PTFE Barrier with or without Xenograft Material: A Randomized Clinical Trial
title_full Socket Preservation Using a (Dense) PTFE Barrier with or without Xenograft Material: A Randomized Clinical Trial
title_fullStr Socket Preservation Using a (Dense) PTFE Barrier with or without Xenograft Material: A Randomized Clinical Trial
title_full_unstemmed Socket Preservation Using a (Dense) PTFE Barrier with or without Xenograft Material: A Randomized Clinical Trial
title_short Socket Preservation Using a (Dense) PTFE Barrier with or without Xenograft Material: A Randomized Clinical Trial
title_sort socket preservation using a (dense) ptfe barrier with or without xenograft material: a randomized clinical trial
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6766191/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31500375
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma12182902
work_keys_str_mv AT decarvalhoformigamarcio socketpreservationusingadenseptfebarrierwithorwithoutxenograftmaterialarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT dayubeulissesribeirocampos socketpreservationusingadenseptfebarrierwithorwithoutxenograftmaterialarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT chiapetticristianekern socketpreservationusingadenseptfebarrierwithorwithoutxenograftmaterialarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT derossifigueiredodaniela socketpreservationusingadenseptfebarrierwithorwithoutxenograftmaterialarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT shiblijamilawad socketpreservationusingadenseptfebarrierwithorwithoutxenograftmaterialarandomizedclinicaltrial