J Oral Implantol. 2022 Apr 21. doi: 10.1563/aaid-joi-D-21-00012. Online ahead of print.
ABSTRACT
To evaluate through histological and histomorphometric analysis of human biopsies the guided bone regeneration (GBR) potential of allograft, xenograft, and alloplastic materials in combination with resorbable membranes in sockets following extraction. This randomized controlled clinical trial comprised three experimental groups and one negative control group (n=8). Thirty-two patients were randomized and pos-extraction sockets received either an allograft (human cancellous bone, freeze dried, DIZG, Berlin), xenograft (BioOss; Geistlich Biomaterials, Switzerland), or alloplast (biphasic calcium sulphate, Bondbone, MIS) graft material, while sockets of the negative control group were left empty for spontaneous healing. At re-entry after three months, bone core biopsies of the treated sites were obtained using a 3.2 mm trephine drill. Bone samples were histologically processed for histomorphometric, qualitatively and quantitatively, analyses with respect to percentages of new vital bone, graft particle content, soft tissue, and bone marrow. Statistical analyses were performed through Kruskal-Wallis test, and p -values were recalculated using Monte Carlo permutation tests ( p <0.05). All three groups presented bone volume suitable for the placement of a dental implant. The xenograft yielded significantly less amount of vital bone in comparison to the allograft and alloplast groups. Comparing the percentage of residual graft particles, there was a significantly greater amount in the xenograft group in contrast to the allograft and alloplast. Similarly, a significant amount of soft tissue (as a function of percentage) was observed within the xenograft group relative to the other groups. No significant differences were detected in the percentage of residual graft particles between the allograft and alloplast groups. Additionally, there was no significant differences observed in vital bone percentage between the allograft, alloplast and control groups. Regarding the evaluation of bone marrow percentage, the only significant difference detected was between the xenograft and the alloplast material. All studied bone substitute materials exhibited bone apposition and adequate properties for their efficient use in alveolar ridge preservation procedures. Of the three grafting materials, allograft evidenced the greatest GBR potential with the highest percentage of vital bone and the lowest percentage of residual graft particles, while xenografts presented the lowest GBR potential after three months in vivo.
PMID:35446950 | DOI:10.1563/aaid-joi-D-21-00012
