Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of rhBMP/β-TCP in alveolar ridge preservation: a multicenter, randomized, open-label, comparative, investigator-blinded clinical trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The aim of this multicenter, randomized, open-label, comparative, investigator-blinded study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2 (rhBMP-2) combined with β-TCP (rhBMP-2/β-TCP) in alveolar ridge preservation.

Materials and methods

Eighty-four subjects from three centers were enrolled in this clinical trial. After tooth extraction, rhBMP-2/β-TCP (n = 41, test group) or β-TCP (n = 43, control group) were grafted to the extraction socket with an absorbable barrier membrane for alveolar ridge preservation. Using computed tomography images obtained immediately after and 12 weeks after surgery, changes in the alveolar bone height and width were analyzed for each group and compared between the two groups.

Results

Both the test and control groups showed a significant decrease in alveolar bone height in the 12 weeks after surgery (both groups, p < 0.0001). However, the test group exhibited a significantly lower decrease in alveolar bone height than the control group (p = 0.0004). Alveolar bone width also showed significantly less resorption in the test group than in the control group for all extraction socket levels (ESL) (p = 0.0152 for 75% ESL; p < 0.0001 for 50% ESL; p < 0.0001 for 25% ESL). There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of adverse events between the two groups. No severe adverse events occurred in either group.

Conclusions

The results of this study suggest that rhBMP-2/β-TCP is a safe graft material that provides a high alveolar bone preservation effect in patients receiving dental extraction.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov , NCT02714829 , Registered 22 March 2016.

SUBMITTER: Han JJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8688599 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Tooth extraction results in alveolar bone resorption and is accompanied by postoperative swelling and pain. Maresin 1 (MaR1) is a proresolving lipid mediator produced by macrophages during the resolution phase of inflammation, bridging healing and tissue regeneration. The aim of this study was to examine the effects of MaR1 on tooth extraction socket wound healing in a preclinical rat model. The maxillary right first molars of Sprague-Dawley rats were extracted, and gelatin scaffolds were placed into the sockets with or without MaR1. Topical application was also given twice a week until complete socket wound closure up to 14 d. Immediate postoperative pain was assessed by 3 scores. Histology and microcomputed tomography were used to assess socket bone fill and alveolar ridge dimensional changes at selected dates. The assessments of coded specimens were performed by masked, calibrated examiners. Local application of MaR1 potently accelerated extraction socket healing. Macroscopic and histologic analysis revealed a reduced soft tissue wound opening and more rapid re-epithelialization with MaR1 delivery versus vehicle on socket healing. Under micro-computed tomography analysis, MaR1 (especially at 0.05 μg/μL) stimulated greater socket bone fill at day 10 as compared with the vehicle-treated animals, resulting in less buccal plate resorption and a wider alveolar ridge by day 21. Interestingly, an increased ratio of CD206+:CD68+ macrophages was identified in the sockets with MaR1 application under immunohistochemistry and immunofluorescence analysis. As compared with the vehicle therapy, local delivery of MaR1 reduced immediate postoperative surrogate pain score panels. In summary, MaR1 accelerated extraction wound healing, promoted socket bone fill, preserved alveolar ridge bone, and reduced postoperative pain in vivo with a rodent preclinical model. Local administration of MaR1 offers clinical potential to accelerate extraction socket wound healing for more predictable dental implant reconstruction.

Project description:BackgroundThere is limited information on the need for bone augmentation in the context of delayed implant placement whether alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) is previously performed or not. The primary aim of this retrospective cohort study was to evaluate the efficacy of ARP therapy after tooth extraction compared with unassisted socket healing (USH) in reducing the need for ancillary bone augmentation before or at the time of implant placement.MethodsAdult subjects that underwent non-molar single tooth extraction with or without simultaneous ARP therapy were included in this study. Cone beam computed tomography scans obtained before tooth extraction and after a variable healing period were used to record the baseline facial bone thickness and to virtually plan implant placement according to a standard method. A logistic regression model was used to evaluate the effect of facial alveolar bone thickness upon tooth extraction and baseline therapy (USH or ARP) on the need for additional bone augmentation, adjusting for several covariates (i.e., age, sex, baseline KMW, and tooth type).ResultsOne hundred and forty subjects that were equally distributed between both baseline therapy groups constituted the study population. Implant placement was deemed virtually feasible in all study sites. Simultaneous bone augmentation was considered necessary in 60% and 11.4% of the sites in the USH and ARP group, respectively. Most of these sites (64.2% in the USH group and 87.5% in the ARP group) exhibited a thin facial bone phenotype (<1 mm) at baseline. Logistic regression revealed that the odds of not needing ancillary bone augmentation were 17.8 times higher in sites that received ARP therapy. Furthermore, the need for additional bone augmentation was reduced 7.7 times for every 1 mm increase in facial bone thickness, regardless of baseline therapy.ConclusionsBased on a digital analysis, ARP therapy, compared with USH, and thick facial alveolar bone largely reduce the need for ancillary bone augmentation at the time of implant placement in non-molar sites.