Cargando…

Comparison Study of the Histomorphometric Results after Socket Preservation with PRF and Allograft Used for Socket Preservation—Randomized Controlled Trials

The aim of the present clinical study was to assess and compare the histomorphometric results and efficacy of freeze-dried bone allograft (FDBA) in combination with platelet-rich fibrin (PRF), and PRF as a sole grafting material for socket preservation. Ninety patients in need of tooth extraction an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ivanova, Vasilena, Chenchev, Ivan, Zlatev, Stefan, Mijiritsky, Eitan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8306316/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34299902
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18147451
_version_ 1783727779603283968
author Ivanova, Vasilena
Chenchev, Ivan
Zlatev, Stefan
Mijiritsky, Eitan
author_facet Ivanova, Vasilena
Chenchev, Ivan
Zlatev, Stefan
Mijiritsky, Eitan
author_sort Ivanova, Vasilena
collection PubMed
description The aim of the present clinical study was to assess and compare the histomorphometric results and efficacy of freeze-dried bone allograft (FDBA) in combination with platelet-rich fibrin (PRF), and PRF as a sole grafting material for socket preservation. Ninety patients in need of tooth extraction and implant restoration were included in this study. The participants were randomly divided into three groups based on post-extraction clinical protocol: socket preservation procedure with allograft in combination with a PRF membrane (PRFm), PRF as a sole grafting material, and a control group. A total of 90 implants were placed four months post-extraction. During the surgical re-entry a bone biopsy was harvested with a trephine drill. Histological samples were prepared and analyzed for percentage vital bone and connective tissue. One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post-hoc analysis were used to assess the results. Both test groups revealed a significantly higher percentage of vital bone formation compared to the control group. No statistically significant differences regarding vital bone formation and connective tissue quantity between the tested groups were observed (FDBA + PRFm: 3.29 ± 13.03%; and PRF: 60.79 ± 9.72%). From a clinical and histological point of view, both materials in the test groups are suitable for the filling of post-extraction sockets without bone defects. Both of the tested groups revealed a significantly higher percentage of vital bone formation compared to the control group.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8306316
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83063162021-07-25 Comparison Study of the Histomorphometric Results after Socket Preservation with PRF and Allograft Used for Socket Preservation—Randomized Controlled Trials Ivanova, Vasilena Chenchev, Ivan Zlatev, Stefan Mijiritsky, Eitan Int J Environ Res Public Health Article The aim of the present clinical study was to assess and compare the histomorphometric results and efficacy of freeze-dried bone allograft (FDBA) in combination with platelet-rich fibrin (PRF), and PRF as a sole grafting material for socket preservation. Ninety patients in need of tooth extraction and implant restoration were included in this study. The participants were randomly divided into three groups based on post-extraction clinical protocol: socket preservation procedure with allograft in combination with a PRF membrane (PRFm), PRF as a sole grafting material, and a control group. A total of 90 implants were placed four months post-extraction. During the surgical re-entry a bone biopsy was harvested with a trephine drill. Histological samples were prepared and analyzed for percentage vital bone and connective tissue. One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post-hoc analysis were used to assess the results. Both test groups revealed a significantly higher percentage of vital bone formation compared to the control group. No statistically significant differences regarding vital bone formation and connective tissue quantity between the tested groups were observed (FDBA + PRFm: 3.29 ± 13.03%; and PRF: 60.79 ± 9.72%). From a clinical and histological point of view, both materials in the test groups are suitable for the filling of post-extraction sockets without bone defects. Both of the tested groups revealed a significantly higher percentage of vital bone formation compared to the control group. MDPI 2021-07-13 /pmc/articles/PMC8306316/ /pubmed/34299902 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18147451 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/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 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Ivanova, Vasilena
Chenchev, Ivan
Zlatev, Stefan
Mijiritsky, Eitan
Comparison Study of the Histomorphometric Results after Socket Preservation with PRF and Allograft Used for Socket Preservation—Randomized Controlled Trials
title Comparison Study of the Histomorphometric Results after Socket Preservation with PRF and Allograft Used for Socket Preservation—Randomized Controlled Trials
title_full Comparison Study of the Histomorphometric Results after Socket Preservation with PRF and Allograft Used for Socket Preservation—Randomized Controlled Trials
title_fullStr Comparison Study of the Histomorphometric Results after Socket Preservation with PRF and Allograft Used for Socket Preservation—Randomized Controlled Trials
title_full_unstemmed Comparison Study of the Histomorphometric Results after Socket Preservation with PRF and Allograft Used for Socket Preservation—Randomized Controlled Trials
title_short Comparison Study of the Histomorphometric Results after Socket Preservation with PRF and Allograft Used for Socket Preservation—Randomized Controlled Trials
title_sort comparison study of the histomorphometric results after socket preservation with prf and allograft used for socket preservation—randomized controlled trials
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8306316/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34299902
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18147451
work_keys_str_mv AT ivanovavasilena comparisonstudyofthehistomorphometricresultsaftersocketpreservationwithprfandallograftusedforsocketpreservationrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT chenchevivan comparisonstudyofthehistomorphometricresultsaftersocketpreservationwithprfandallograftusedforsocketpreservationrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT zlatevstefan comparisonstudyofthehistomorphometricresultsaftersocketpreservationwithprfandallograftusedforsocketpreservationrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT mijiritskyeitan comparisonstudyofthehistomorphometricresultsaftersocketpreservationwithprfandallograftusedforsocketpreservationrandomizedcontrolledtrials