心包膜与钛网对萎缩上颌骨水平嵴增强的临床与组织学随机对照研究。

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Ahmed Wafaa Abdel Azeem Bughdadi Abaza, Waleed Mohammed Abbas, Dina Mohammed Abdel Khalik, Nevine Hassan Kheir El Din
{"title":"心包膜与钛网对萎缩上颌骨水平嵴增强的临床与组织学随机对照研究。","authors":"Ahmed Wafaa Abdel Azeem Bughdadi Abaza,&nbsp;Waleed Mohammed Abbas,&nbsp;Dina Mohammed Abdel Khalik,&nbsp;Nevine Hassan Kheir El Din","doi":"10.11607/jomi.9715","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the outcomes of maxillary horizontal alveolar ridge augmentation in the esthetic area, using either pericardium membrane or titanium mesh, clinically, radiographically, and histologically.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A randomized clinical study was performed on 20 patients with insufficient edentulous ridge width. Subjects were equally allocated into two groups. For both groups, autogenous tenting bone blocks were harvested from the symphysis area. Bone block was covered by an equal mixture (1:1) of particulate graft of inorganic bovine bone and autogenous bone matrix. The barrier membrane used in group 1 (PM) was bovine pericardium membrane, and in group 2 (TM), it was titanium mesh.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both groups had a clinically statistically significant difference in buccopalatal alveolar ridge dimension between baseline and after 4 months. Radiographically, at both intervals, there was no significant difference in 3D volume between both groups. Within both groups, there was a significant volume increase postoperatively. Histologically, the PM group had a lower area fraction of the mean value of newly formed bone than the TM group, yet the difference was not significant. The PM group had a higher mean osteocyte count than the TM group, but again, the difference was not significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Guided bone regeneration using either pericardium membrane or titanium mesh is a reliable treatment for horizontal augmentation of insufficient maxillary alveolar ridge width. No significant differences between both treatment modalities were noticed clinically and histologically. However, percentage change in radiographic volumetric measurements using TM was significantly higher than that of PM. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2023;38:451-461. doi: 10.11607/jomi.9715.</p>","PeriodicalId":50298,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants","volume":"38 3","pages":"451-461"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Horizontal Ridge Augmentation of the Atrophic Maxilla Using Pericardium Membrane Versus Titanium Mesh: A Clinical and Histologic Randomized Comparative Study.\",\"authors\":\"Ahmed Wafaa Abdel Azeem Bughdadi Abaza,&nbsp;Waleed Mohammed Abbas,&nbsp;Dina Mohammed Abdel Khalik,&nbsp;Nevine Hassan Kheir El Din\",\"doi\":\"10.11607/jomi.9715\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the outcomes of maxillary horizontal alveolar ridge augmentation in the esthetic area, using either pericardium membrane or titanium mesh, clinically, radiographically, and histologically.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A randomized clinical study was performed on 20 patients with insufficient edentulous ridge width. Subjects were equally allocated into two groups. For both groups, autogenous tenting bone blocks were harvested from the symphysis area. Bone block was covered by an equal mixture (1:1) of particulate graft of inorganic bovine bone and autogenous bone matrix. The barrier membrane used in group 1 (PM) was bovine pericardium membrane, and in group 2 (TM), it was titanium mesh.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both groups had a clinically statistically significant difference in buccopalatal alveolar ridge dimension between baseline and after 4 months. Radiographically, at both intervals, there was no significant difference in 3D volume between both groups. Within both groups, there was a significant volume increase postoperatively. Histologically, the PM group had a lower area fraction of the mean value of newly formed bone than the TM group, yet the difference was not significant. The PM group had a higher mean osteocyte count than the TM group, but again, the difference was not significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Guided bone regeneration using either pericardium membrane or titanium mesh is a reliable treatment for horizontal augmentation of insufficient maxillary alveolar ridge width. No significant differences between both treatment modalities were noticed clinically and histologically. However, percentage change in radiographic volumetric measurements using TM was significantly higher than that of PM. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2023;38:451-461. doi: 10.11607/jomi.9715.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50298,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants\",\"volume\":\"38 3\",\"pages\":\"451-461\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.9715\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.9715","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较采用心包膜或钛网在美观区进行上颌水平牙槽嵴增强的临床、影像学和组织学结果。材料与方法:对20例无牙嵴宽度不足患者进行随机临床研究。受试者被平均分为两组。两组均从联合区取自体帐篷状骨块。骨块由无机牛骨颗粒移植物和自体骨基质等比例(1:1)覆盖。1组(PM)屏障膜为牛心包膜,2组(TM)屏障膜为钛网。结果:两组患者4个月后牙槽嵴尺寸与基线值比较差异均有统计学意义。x线摄影,在两个间隔,两组之间的三维体积无显著差异。两组术后体积均显著增加。组织学上,PM组新生骨面积占平均值的比例低于TM组,但差异不显著。PM组平均骨细胞计数高于TM组,但差异也不显著。结论:采用心包膜或钛网引导骨再生是治疗上颌牙槽嵴宽度不足的一种可靠的方法。两种治疗方式在临床和组织学上均无显著差异。然而,使用TM的放射学体积测量的百分比变化明显高于PM。口腔颌面种植[J]; 2009;38(3):451-461。doi: 10.11607 / jomi.9715。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Horizontal Ridge Augmentation of the Atrophic Maxilla Using Pericardium Membrane Versus Titanium Mesh: A Clinical and Histologic Randomized Comparative Study.

Purpose: To compare the outcomes of maxillary horizontal alveolar ridge augmentation in the esthetic area, using either pericardium membrane or titanium mesh, clinically, radiographically, and histologically.

Materials and methods: A randomized clinical study was performed on 20 patients with insufficient edentulous ridge width. Subjects were equally allocated into two groups. For both groups, autogenous tenting bone blocks were harvested from the symphysis area. Bone block was covered by an equal mixture (1:1) of particulate graft of inorganic bovine bone and autogenous bone matrix. The barrier membrane used in group 1 (PM) was bovine pericardium membrane, and in group 2 (TM), it was titanium mesh.

Results: Both groups had a clinically statistically significant difference in buccopalatal alveolar ridge dimension between baseline and after 4 months. Radiographically, at both intervals, there was no significant difference in 3D volume between both groups. Within both groups, there was a significant volume increase postoperatively. Histologically, the PM group had a lower area fraction of the mean value of newly formed bone than the TM group, yet the difference was not significant. The PM group had a higher mean osteocyte count than the TM group, but again, the difference was not significant.

Conclusion: Guided bone regeneration using either pericardium membrane or titanium mesh is a reliable treatment for horizontal augmentation of insufficient maxillary alveolar ridge width. No significant differences between both treatment modalities were noticed clinically and histologically. However, percentage change in radiographic volumetric measurements using TM was significantly higher than that of PM. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2023;38:451-461. doi: 10.11607/jomi.9715.

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
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.00%
发文量
115
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Edited by Steven E. Eckert, DDS, MS ISSN (Print): 0882-2786 ISSN (Online): 1942-4434 This highly regarded, often-cited journal integrates clinical and scientific data to improve methods and results of oral and maxillofacial implant therapy. It presents pioneering research, technology, clinical applications, reviews of the literature, seminal studies, emerging technology, position papers, and consensus studies, as well as the many clinical and therapeutic innovations that ensue as a result of these efforts. The editorial board is composed of recognized opinion leaders in their respective areas of expertise and reflects the international reach of the journal. Under their leadership, JOMI maintains its strong scientific integrity while expanding its influence within the field of implant dentistry. JOMI’s popular regular feature "Thematic Abstract Review" presents a review of abstracts of recently published articles on a specific topical area of interest each issue.
×
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