Eran Gabay DMD, PhD, Eli Regev DMD, Yaniv Mayer DMD, Jacob Horwitz DMD, Thabet Asbi DMD, Ofir Ginesin DMD, Hadar Zigdon-Giladi DMD, PhD
{"title":"牙槽嵴保留区种植体周围组织的变化：为期 1 年的随机对照临床试验。","authors":"Eran Gabay DMD, PhD, Eli Regev DMD, Yaniv Mayer DMD, Jacob Horwitz DMD, Thabet Asbi DMD, Ofir Ginesin DMD, Hadar Zigdon-Giladi DMD, PhD","doi":"10.1111/cid.13348","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>This study aimed to assess radiographic marginal bone changes 22 months post extraction, which is 1 year after implant loading in alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) sites grafted with a combination of collagen-embedded xenogenic bone substitute (DBBM-C) and collagen matrix (CMX), comparing them with implants placed in naturally healed sites.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>This randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted over 22 months. Patients who needed a single tooth extraction and subsequent implant placement in nonmolar areas were enrolled. The test group received deproteinized bovine bone mineral with 10% collagen covered by a procaine collagen membrane, while the control group allowed spontaneous healing. Radiographic bone level changes were documented using periapical radiographs at implant placement and follow-up visits (6, 10, and 22 months postextraction). Early implant soft tissue exposure, clinical parameters, and patient-reported outcomes were recorded.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Twenty-two out of 28 participants completed a 22-month follow-up, 9 in the test group and 13 in the control group. At 10-month postextraction follow-up, the mean MBL was 1.01 ± 1.04 mm in the treatment group and 0.81 ± 0.93 mm in the control group (<i>p</i> = 0.804). At 22 months, the mean MBL was 2.09 ± 1.03 mm in the treatment group and 1.58 ± 0.73 mm in the control group (<i>p</i> = 0.339). No statistically significant differences in probing depth (PD) and bleeding on probing (BOP) were found at the 22 -month follow-up as well. Soft tissue mean recession was observed in the control group (0.36 ± 0.84 mm), while no recession was found in the test group (<i>p</i> = 0.2). Early implant soft tissue exposure occurred in 33% of test group participants, while none was observed in the control group (<i>p</i> = 0.047).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>One year after implant loading, no significant differences in marginal bone resorption were found between implants placed in ARP-treated and naturally healed sites. However, ARP-treated sites exhibited early implant soft-tissue exposure, suggesting a possible impairment in soft tissue healing.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50679,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research","volume":"26 4","pages":"742-749"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cid.13348","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tissue changes around dental implants installed in alveolar ridge preservation sites: A 1-year follow-up randomized controlled clinical trial\",\"authors\":\"Eran Gabay DMD, PhD, Eli Regev DMD, Yaniv Mayer DMD, Jacob Horwitz DMD, Thabet Asbi DMD, Ofir Ginesin DMD, Hadar Zigdon-Giladi DMD, PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/cid.13348\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objective</h3>\\n \\n <p>This study aimed to assess radiographic marginal bone changes 22 months post extraction, which is 1 year after implant loading in alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) sites grafted with a combination of collagen-embedded xenogenic bone substitute (DBBM-C) and collagen matrix (CMX), comparing them with implants placed in naturally healed sites.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>This randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted over 22 months. Patients who needed a single tooth extraction and subsequent implant placement in nonmolar areas were enrolled. The test group received deproteinized bovine bone mineral with 10% collagen covered by a procaine collagen membrane, while the control group allowed spontaneous healing. Radiographic bone level changes were documented using periapical radiographs at implant placement and follow-up visits (6, 10, and 22 months postextraction). Early implant soft tissue exposure, clinical parameters, and patient-reported outcomes were recorded.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Twenty-two out of 28 participants completed a 22-month follow-up, 9 in the test group and 13 in the control group. At 10-month postextraction follow-up, the mean MBL was 1.01 ± 1.04 mm in the treatment group and 0.81 ± 0.93 mm in the control group (<i>p</i> = 0.804). At 22 months, the mean MBL was 2.09 ± 1.03 mm in the treatment group and 1.58 ± 0.73 mm in the control group (<i>p</i> = 0.339). No statistically significant differences in probing depth (PD) and bleeding on probing (BOP) were found at the 22 -month follow-up as well. Soft tissue mean recession was observed in the control group (0.36 ± 0.84 mm), while no recession was found in the test group (<i>p</i> = 0.2). Early implant soft tissue exposure occurred in 33% of test group participants, while none was observed in the control group (<i>p</i> = 0.047).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>One year after implant loading, no significant differences in marginal bone resorption were found between implants placed in ARP-treated and naturally healed sites. However, ARP-treated sites exhibited early implant soft-tissue exposure, suggesting a possible impairment in soft tissue healing.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50679,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research\",\"volume\":\"26 4\",\"pages\":\"742-749\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cid.13348\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cid.13348\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cid.13348","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Tissue changes around dental implants installed in alveolar ridge preservation sites: A 1-year follow-up randomized controlled clinical trial
Objective
This study aimed to assess radiographic marginal bone changes 22 months post extraction, which is 1 year after implant loading in alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) sites grafted with a combination of collagen-embedded xenogenic bone substitute (DBBM-C) and collagen matrix (CMX), comparing them with implants placed in naturally healed sites.
Methods
This randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted over 22 months. Patients who needed a single tooth extraction and subsequent implant placement in nonmolar areas were enrolled. The test group received deproteinized bovine bone mineral with 10% collagen covered by a procaine collagen membrane, while the control group allowed spontaneous healing. Radiographic bone level changes were documented using periapical radiographs at implant placement and follow-up visits (6, 10, and 22 months postextraction). Early implant soft tissue exposure, clinical parameters, and patient-reported outcomes were recorded.
Results
Twenty-two out of 28 participants completed a 22-month follow-up, 9 in the test group and 13 in the control group. At 10-month postextraction follow-up, the mean MBL was 1.01 ± 1.04 mm in the treatment group and 0.81 ± 0.93 mm in the control group (p = 0.804). At 22 months, the mean MBL was 2.09 ± 1.03 mm in the treatment group and 1.58 ± 0.73 mm in the control group (p = 0.339). No statistically significant differences in probing depth (PD) and bleeding on probing (BOP) were found at the 22 -month follow-up as well. Soft tissue mean recession was observed in the control group (0.36 ± 0.84 mm), while no recession was found in the test group (p = 0.2). Early implant soft tissue exposure occurred in 33% of test group participants, while none was observed in the control group (p = 0.047).
Conclusion
One year after implant loading, no significant differences in marginal bone resorption were found between implants placed in ARP-treated and naturally healed sites. However, ARP-treated sites exhibited early implant soft-tissue exposure, suggesting a possible impairment in soft tissue healing.
期刊介绍：
The goal of Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research is to advance the scientific and technical aspects relating to dental implants and related scientific subjects. Dissemination of new and evolving information related to dental implants and the related science is the primary goal of our journal.
The range of topics covered by the journals will include but be not limited to:
New scientific developments relating to bone
Implant surfaces and their relationship to the surrounding tissues
Computer aided implant designs
Computer aided prosthetic designs
Immediate implant loading
Immediate implant placement
Materials relating to bone induction and conduction
New surgical methods relating to implant placement
New materials and methods relating to implant restorations
Methods for determining implant stability
A primary focus of the journal is publication of evidenced based articles evaluating to new dental implants, techniques and multicenter studies evaluating these treatments. In addition basic science research relating to wound healing and osseointegration will be an important focus for the journal.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
