Dataset Information

Immediate implant placement in anterior teeth with grafting material of autogenous tooth bone vs xenogenic bone.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy of the autogenous tooth bone and xenogenic bone grafted in immediate implant placement with bone defect. METHODS:Thirty patients whose compromised anterior teeth need immediate implant placement were enrolled. Autogenous tooth bone made from the extracted teeth by chair-side or the xenogenic bone were used to repaired bone defect. Clinical examination, radiographic assessment about the horizontal bone change in the level of 0?mm, 3?mm and 6?mm below the implant neck and the marginal bone loss were made immediately, 6 and 12?months after implant placement. Questionnaire of the feelings about the surgery were made at the time of removing the sutures. RESULTS:All implants achieved the success criteria without any complications at the follow-up period. The percent of the horizontal bone change and the marginal bone loss at 6 and 12?months were almost the same between two groups (P?>?.05). The horizontal bone loss at the first or the latter 6?months was almost the same (P?>?.05). But the horizontal bone loss at the 6?mm level was less than the 0?mm and 3?mm levels at 6 and 12?months (P?

SUBMITTER: Wu D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6889614 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Immediate implant placement in anterior teeth with grafting material of autogenous tooth bone vs xenogenic bone.

Wu Dong D Zhou Lin L Lin Jichao J Chen Jiang J Huang Wenxiu W Chen Yonghui Y

BMC oral health 20191202 1

<h4>Background</h4>The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy of the autogenous tooth bone and xenogenic bone grafted in immediate implant placement with bone defect.<h4>Methods</h4>Thirty patients whose compromised anterior teeth need immediate implant placement were enrolled. Autogenous tooth bone made from the extracted teeth by chair-side or the xenogenic bone were used to repaired bone defect. Clinical examination, radiographic assessment about the horizontal bone change in the level ...[more]

PMID: 31791302

Similar Datasets

Project description:Several authors have suggested that implants can be placed simultaneously with onlay bone grafts without affecting outcomes. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to answer the following clinical questions: (1) What are the outcomes of implants placed simultaneously with autogenous onlay bone grafts? And (2) is there a difference in outcomes between simultaneous vs delayed placement of implants with autogenous onlay bone grafts? Databases of PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched up to 15 November 2020. Data on implant survival was extracted from all the included studies (single arm and comparative) to calculate point estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and pooled using the DerSimonian-Laird meta-analysis model. We also compared implant survival rates between the simultaneous and delayed placement of implants with data from comparative studies. Nineteen studies were included. Five of them compared simultaneous and delayed placement of implants. Dividing the studies based on follow-up duration, the pooled survival of implant placed simultaneously with onlay grafts after <2.5 years of follow-up was 93.1% (95% CI 82.6 to 97.4%) and after 2.5-5 years was 86% (95% CI 78.6 to 91.1%). Implant survival was found to be 85.8% (95% CI 79.6 to 90.3%) with iliac crest grafts and 95.7% (95% CI 83.9 to 93.0%) with intra-oral grafts. Our results indicated no statistically significant difference in implant survival between simultaneous and delayed placement (OR 0.43, 95% 0.07, 2.49, I2=59.04%). Data on implant success and bone loss were limited. Data indicates that implants placed simultaneously with autogenous onlay grafts have a survival rate of 93.1% and 86% after a follow-up of <2.5 years and 2.5-5years respectively. A limited number of studies indicate no significant difference in implant survival between the simultaneous and delayed placement of implants with onlay bone grafts. There is a need for randomized controlled trials comparing simultaneous and delayed implant placement to provide robust evidence.

Project description:ObjectivesAssessment of the clinical performance of a porcine dentin-derived particulate bone graft material for bone regeneration after tooth extraction with implant placement at 4 months, in comparison to a commercially available porcine bone-derived graft.Material and methodsThis study was a randomized, parallel-group, semi-double-blinded clinical trial evaluating the clinical safety, tolerability, and performance of Ivory Dentin Graft™ in comparison with a commercial bone-derived material in alveolar ridge preservation following tooth extraction (registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, May 12th, 2017, Identifier NCT03150472). Extraction sites were grafted with test or comparator material and a titanium implant placed at 4 months after taking a graft site biopsy. Primary endpoints were the extent of new bone growth and bone-graft integration at 4 months.ResultsThe dentin graft material had statistically significantly more new bone formation (60.75% vs 42.81%, p = 0.0084, N = 20 vs 16), better bone-graft integration scores (good integration in 85% vs 40%, p = 0.0066), and higher mean radiodensity of the bone (981.5HU vs 727.7HU, p = 0.0011) at the graft site compared to the bone-derived material. The mean implant insertion torque force was similar for the dentin and bone materials (34.75 Ncm vs 34.06 Ncm). Titanium implant placement was successful in 95% of patients with the dentin graft material compared to 81.25% for the bone graft. Both materials had similar clinical safety and tolerability as determined by adverse events and local site reactions. Physician-assessed ease of grafting and ease of implant placement on a 10-point scale showed no statistical differences (8.78 vs 8.27, p = 0.2355; 8.05 vs 8.75, p = 0.1118, respectively).ConclusionsA porcine dentin-derived bone graft material has clinical safety, tolerability, and performance for implant placement at 4 months after tooth extraction at least as good as a commercial bone-derived material.Clinical relevanceThe availability of porcine dentin-derived bone graft material allows wider use of dentin-derived material which has so far only been available in the form of autologous dentin from the patient's own teeth.

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy of using a bone substitute material (BSM) in the fixture-socket gap in patients undergoing tooth extraction and immediate implant placement.Materials and methodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). RCTs were screened for eligibility, and data were extracted by two authors independently. Risk of bias (ROB) was assessed using Cochrane's ROB tool 2.0. Primary outcomes were implant failure, overall complications, and soft-tissue esthetics. Secondary outcomes were vertical buccal bone resorption, vertical interproximal bone resorption, horizontal buccal bone resorption, and mid-buccal mucosal recession. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effects model with generic inverse variance weighing. GRADE was used to grade the certainty of the evidence.ResultsAfter screening 19 544 potentially eligible references, 20 RCTs were included in this review, with a total of 848 patients (916 sites). Most included RCTs were deemed of some concerns (53%) or at low (38%) risk of bias, except for overall complications (high ROB). Implant failure did not differ significantly RR = 0.92 (confidence intervals [CI] 0.34 to 2.46) between using a BSM compared with not using a BSM (NoBSM). BSM use resulted in less horizontal buccal bone resorption (MD = -0.52 mm [95% CI -0.74 to -0.30]), a higher esthetic score (MD = 1.49 [95% CI 0.46 to 2.53]), but also more complications (RR = 3.50 [95% CI 1.11 to 11.1] compared with NoBSM. Too few trials compared types of BSMs against each other to allow for pooled analyses. The certainty of the evidence was considered moderate for all outcomes except implant failure (low), overall complications (very low), and vertical interproximal bone resorption (very low).ConclusionBSM use during immediate implant placement reduces horizontal buccal bone resorption and improves the periimplant soft-tissue esthetics. Although BSM use increases the risk of predominantly minor complications.

Dataset Information

Immediate implant placement in anterior teeth with grafting material of autogenous tooth bone vs xenogenic bone.

Publications

Immediate implant placement in anterior teeth with grafting material of autogenous tooth bone vs xenogenic bone.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets