水平引导骨再生:L-PRF骨块Vs自体骨与脱蛋白牛骨矿物质的混合物。一项25个月随访的裂口RCT研究。

Rutger A L Dhondt, Marc Quirynen, Pierre Lahoud, Simone Cortellini, Andy Temmerman
{"title":"水平引导骨再生:L-PRF骨块Vs自体骨与脱蛋白牛骨矿物质的混合物。一项25个月随访的裂口RCT研究。","authors":"Rutger A L Dhondt, Marc Quirynen, Pierre Lahoud, Simone Cortellini, Andy Temmerman","doi":"10.11607/jomi.11095","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aims to assess the differences between a leukocyte- and platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) and deproteinized bovine bone mineral block and a combination of 50% autogenous bone (AB) and 50% deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) as grafting material for horizontal guided bone regeneration (GBR).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This randomized double-blind split-mouth clinical trial included 13 subjects requiring bilateral horizontal bone augmentation. Each patient received both treatment modalities: one side of the jaw was treated by GBR with the L-PRF and deproteinized bovine bone mineral block, and the other side with a 50/50 mixture of AB and DBBM. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were used to evaluate horizontal bone width (HBW) and buccal bone thickness (BBT) at various time points: baseline (T0), immediately post-augmentation (T1), at implant placement (T2), and one year after abutment connection (T4). Bone sounding (BS) was also used to verify CBCT measurements.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No statistically significant differences were found in HBW gain between test (L-PRF) and control (AB/DBBM) sites at any timepoint. Both sites showed significant HBW loss post-implant placement, with more bone volume lost at higher crestal levels (Sh0 > Sh2 > Sh4). At the Sh2 level, 48.8% of the HBW gain at T1 was lost by T4 in test sites, and 46.2% in control sites. Similarly, BBT at Sh2 reduced from 4.7 ± 1.0 mm to 1.3 ± 1.5 mm in test sites and from 2.1 ± 1.0 mm to 0.9 ± 0.8 mm in control sites. Both groups of sites had one complication, resulting in a 91.6% success rate for both treatments. The cumulative survival rate of implants was 100% at 16 months, with a mean interproximal bone level (IBL) loss of 0.2 ± 0.9 mm and 0.1 ± 0.6 mm for test and control sites, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>No statistically significant differences were found between the AB/DBBM composite graft and the L-PRF and bovine bone mineral block for horizontal GBR. Significant resorption of grafted volume occurs within 25 months, continuing post-implant placement. Further research with larger sample sizes is needed to confirm these findings and optimize GBR techniques.</p>","PeriodicalId":94230,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-30"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Horizontal Guided Bone Regeneration: L-PRF Bone-Block Vs A Mixture of Autogenous Bone with Deproteinized Bovine Bone Mineral. A Split-Mouth RCT Study with 25 Months Follow-Up.\",\"authors\":\"Rutger A L Dhondt, Marc Quirynen, Pierre Lahoud, Simone Cortellini, Andy Temmerman\",\"doi\":\"10.11607/jomi.11095\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aims to assess the differences between a leukocyte- and platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) and deproteinized bovine bone mineral block and a combination of 50% autogenous bone (AB) and 50% deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) as grafting material for horizontal guided bone regeneration (GBR).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This randomized double-blind split-mouth clinical trial included 13 subjects requiring bilateral horizontal bone augmentation. Each patient received both treatment modalities: one side of the jaw was treated by GBR with the L-PRF and deproteinized bovine bone mineral block, and the other side with a 50/50 mixture of AB and DBBM. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were used to evaluate horizontal bone width (HBW) and buccal bone thickness (BBT) at various time points: baseline (T0), immediately post-augmentation (T1), at implant placement (T2), and one year after abutment connection (T4). Bone sounding (BS) was also used to verify CBCT measurements.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No statistically significant differences were found in HBW gain between test (L-PRF) and control (AB/DBBM) sites at any timepoint. Both sites showed significant HBW loss post-implant placement, with more bone volume lost at higher crestal levels (Sh0 > Sh2 > Sh4). At the Sh2 level, 48.8% of the HBW gain at T1 was lost by T4 in test sites, and 46.2% in control sites. Similarly, BBT at Sh2 reduced from 4.7 ± 1.0 mm to 1.3 ± 1.5 mm in test sites and from 2.1 ± 1.0 mm to 0.9 ± 0.8 mm in control sites. Both groups of sites had one complication, resulting in a 91.6% success rate for both treatments. The cumulative survival rate of implants was 100% at 16 months, with a mean interproximal bone level (IBL) loss of 0.2 ± 0.9 mm and 0.1 ± 0.6 mm for test and control sites, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>No statistically significant differences were found between the AB/DBBM composite graft and the L-PRF and bovine bone mineral block for horizontal GBR. Significant resorption of grafted volume occurs within 25 months, continuing post-implant placement. Further research with larger sample sizes is needed to confirm these findings and optimize GBR techniques.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94230,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants\",\"volume\":\"0 0\",\"pages\":\"1-30\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.11095\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.11095","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在评估富含白细胞和血小板的纤维蛋白(L-PRF)和脱蛋白牛骨矿物质块与50%自体骨(AB)和50%脱蛋白牛骨矿物质(DBBM)组合作为水平引导骨再生(GBR)移植材料的差异。材料和方法:本随机双盲裂口临床试验包括13例需要双侧水平骨增强术的受试者。每位患者均接受两种治疗方式:一侧颌骨采用L-PRF和去蛋白牛骨矿物块的GBR治疗,另一侧则采用50/50的AB和DBBM混合治疗。锥形束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)用于评估不同时间点的水平骨宽度(HBW)和颊骨厚度(BBT):基线(T0),增强后立即(T1),种植体放置(T2)和基牙连接后一年(T4)。骨探(BS)也用于验证CBCT测量结果。结果:在任何时间点,试验点(L-PRF)和对照组(AB/DBBM)的HBW增益均无统计学差异。种植体植入后,这两个部位的HBW都有明显的损失,在较高的嵴水平(Sh0 > Sh2 > Sh4),骨体积损失更多。在Sh2水平,T1时HBW增加的48.8%在试验点被T4损失,在对照点46.2%。同样,Sh2点的BBT在试验点从4.7±1.0 mm减少到1.3±1.5 mm,在对照点从2.1±1.0 mm减少到0.9±0.8 mm。两组均有一例并发症,两种治疗的成功率均为91.6%。16个月时种植体的累积成活率为100%,试验点和对照点的平均近端骨水平(IBL)损失分别为0.2±0.9 mm和0.1±0.6 mm。结论:AB/DBBM复合移植物与L-PRF和牛骨矿物块用于水平GBR无统计学差异。植体体积的显著吸收发生在植体放置后的25个月内。需要更大样本量的进一步研究来证实这些发现并优化GBR技术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Horizontal Guided Bone Regeneration: L-PRF Bone-Block Vs A Mixture of Autogenous Bone with Deproteinized Bovine Bone Mineral. A Split-Mouth RCT Study with 25 Months Follow-Up.

Purpose: This study aims to assess the differences between a leukocyte- and platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) and deproteinized bovine bone mineral block and a combination of 50% autogenous bone (AB) and 50% deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) as grafting material for horizontal guided bone regeneration (GBR).

Materials and methods: This randomized double-blind split-mouth clinical trial included 13 subjects requiring bilateral horizontal bone augmentation. Each patient received both treatment modalities: one side of the jaw was treated by GBR with the L-PRF and deproteinized bovine bone mineral block, and the other side with a 50/50 mixture of AB and DBBM. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were used to evaluate horizontal bone width (HBW) and buccal bone thickness (BBT) at various time points: baseline (T0), immediately post-augmentation (T1), at implant placement (T2), and one year after abutment connection (T4). Bone sounding (BS) was also used to verify CBCT measurements.

Results: No statistically significant differences were found in HBW gain between test (L-PRF) and control (AB/DBBM) sites at any timepoint. Both sites showed significant HBW loss post-implant placement, with more bone volume lost at higher crestal levels (Sh0 > Sh2 > Sh4). At the Sh2 level, 48.8% of the HBW gain at T1 was lost by T4 in test sites, and 46.2% in control sites. Similarly, BBT at Sh2 reduced from 4.7 ± 1.0 mm to 1.3 ± 1.5 mm in test sites and from 2.1 ± 1.0 mm to 0.9 ± 0.8 mm in control sites. Both groups of sites had one complication, resulting in a 91.6% success rate for both treatments. The cumulative survival rate of implants was 100% at 16 months, with a mean interproximal bone level (IBL) loss of 0.2 ± 0.9 mm and 0.1 ± 0.6 mm for test and control sites, respectively.

Conclusions: No statistically significant differences were found between the AB/DBBM composite graft and the L-PRF and bovine bone mineral block for horizontal GBR. Significant resorption of grafted volume occurs within 25 months, continuing post-implant placement. Further research with larger sample sizes is needed to confirm these findings and optimize GBR techniques.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信