Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science

Korean Academy of Periodontology (대한치주과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Alveolar ridge preservation with a collagen material: a randomized controlled trial

  • Schnutenhaus, Sigmar (Private Practice) ;
  • Doering, Isabel (Private Practice) ;
  • Dreyhaupt, Jens (Institute of Epidemiology and Medical Biometry, Ulm University) ;
  • Rudolph, Heike (Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Center of Dentistry, Ulm University) ;
  • Luthardt, Ralph G. (Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Center of Dentistry, Ulm University)
  • Received : 2018.07.19
  • Accepted : 2018.08.19
  • Published : 2018.08.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: Resorption of the alveolar bone is an unavoidable consequence of tooth extraction when appropriate alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) measures are not taken. The objective of this trial was to test the hypothesis that dimensional changes in the alveolar bone after tooth extraction would be reduced by inserting an equine collagen membrane and a collagen cone to fill and seal the alveolus (as ARP), in comparison to extraction with untreated alveoli. Methods: In this randomized clinical trial, 31 patients were directly treated with the collagen material after extraction of a tooth from the maxilla (the ARP group). Twenty-nine patients served as the control group. After extraction, no further treatment (i.e., no socket preservation measures) was performed in the control group. Changes in the alveolar process immediately after extraction and after an 8 (${\pm}1$)-week healing period were evaluated 3-dimensionally. Blinded analyses were performed after superimposing the data from the digitalized impressions and surfaces generated by cone-beam computed tomography. Results: Both the ARP and control groups showed a reduction of bone in the alveolar area after tooth extraction. However, significantly less bone resorption was detected in the clinically relevant buccal region in the ARP group. The median bone reduction was 1.18 mm in the ARP group and 5.06 mm in the control group (P=0.03). Conclusions: The proposed hypothesis that inserting a combination material comprising a collagen cone and membrane would lead to a difference in alveolar bone preservation can be accepted for the clinically relevant buccal distance. In this area, implantation of the collagen material led to significantly less alveolar bone resorption. German Clinical Trials Register at www.drks.de, DRKS00004769.

Keywords

References

  1. Tan WL, Wong TL, Wong MC, Lang NP. A systematic review of post-extractional alveolar hard and soft tissue dimensional changes in humans. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23 Suppl 5:1-21.
  2. Chappuis V, Engel O, Reyes M, Shahim K, Nolte LP, Buser D. Ridge alterations post-extraction in the esthetic zone: a 3D analysis with CBCT. J Dent Res 2013;92:195S-201S. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034513506713
  3. Schmidlin PR, Jung RE, Schug J. Prevention of alveolar ridge resorption after tooth extraction--a review. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 2004;114:328-36.
  4. Iyer S, Haribabu PK, Xing Y. Part II. Minimizing alveolar bone loss during and after extractions. Protocol and techniques for alveolar bone preservation. Alpha Omegan 2014;107:14-25.
  5. Mardas N, Chadha V, Donos N. Alveolar ridge preservation with guided bone regeneration and a synthetic bone substitute or a bovine-derived xenograft: a randomized, controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010;21:688-98. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01918.x
  6. Trombelli L, Farina R, Marzola A, Bozzi L, Liljenberg B, Lindhe J. Modeling and remodeling of human extraction sockets. J Clin Periodontol 2008;35:630-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2008.01246.x
  7. Sanz I, Garcia-Gargallo M, Herrera D, Martin C, Figuero E, Sanz M. Surgical protocols for early implant placement in post-extraction sockets: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23 Suppl 5:67-79.
  8. Ten Heggeler JM, Slot DE, Van der Weijden GA. Effect of socket preservation therapies following tooth extraction in non-molar regions in humans: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2011;22:779-88. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02064.x
  9. Misch CE, Dietsh-Misch F, Misch CM. A modified socket seal surgery with composite graft approach. J Oral Implantol 1999;25:244-50. https://doi.org/10.1563/1548-1336(1999)025<0244:AMSSSW>2.3.CO;2
  10. Crespi R, Cappare P, Gherlone EF. Bone recontouring in fresh sockets with buccal bone loss: a cone beam computed tomography study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014;29:863-8. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3506
  11. Vittorini Orgeas G, Clementini M, De Risi V, de Sanctis M. Surgical techniques for alveolar socket preservation: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2013;28:1049-61. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.2670
  12. Pagni G, Pellegrini G, Giannobile WV, Rasperini G. Postextraction alveolar ridge preservation: biological basis and treatments. Int J Dent 2012;2012:151030.
  13. Lambert F, Vincent K, Vanhoutte V, Seidel L, Lecloux G, Rompen E. A methodological approach to assessing alveolar ridge preservation procedures in humans: hard tissue profile. J Clin Periodontol 2012;39:887-94. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2012.01900.x
  14. Annen BM, Schneider D, Schmidlin PR. Ridge preservation after tooth extraction using collagen cones with integrated membranes: a case series and volumetric analysis. Implantologie 2014;22:341-51.
  15. Kunert-Keil C, Gredes T, Heinemann F, Dominiak M, Botzenhart U, Gedrange T. Socket augmentation using a commercial collagen-based product--an animal study in pigs. Mater Sci Eng C 2015;46:177-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2014.10.033
  16. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DGCONSORT. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel group randomized trials. BMC Med Res Methodol 2001;1:2. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-1-2
  17. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, Group CCONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. J Clin Epidemiol 2010;63:834-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.02.005
  18. Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gotzsche PC, Devereaux PJ, et al. CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. J Clin Epidemiol 2010;63:e1-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.03.004
  19. Fickl S, Zuhr O, Wachtel H, Stappert CF, Stein JM, Hurzeler MB. Dimensional changes of the alveolar ridge contour after different socket preservation techniques. J Clin Periodontol 2008;35:906-13. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2008.01305.x
  20. de Avila ED, Filho JS, de Oliveira Ramalho LT, Real Gabrielli MF, Pereira Filho VA. Alveolar ridge augmentation with the perforated and nonperforated bone grafts. J Periodontal Implant Sci 2014;44:33-8. https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2014.44.1.33
  21. Leung CC, Palomo L, Griffith R, Hans MG. Accuracy and reliability of cone-beam computed tomography for measuring alveolar bone height and detecting bony dehiscences and fenestrations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;137:S109-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.07.013
  22. Schulze R, Heil U, Gross D, Bruellmann DD, Dranischnikow E, Schwanecke U, et al. Artefacts in CBCT: a review. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2011;40:265-73. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/30642039
  23. Seibert JS, Cohen DW. Periodontal considerations in preparation for fixed and removable prosthodontics. Dent Clin North Am 1987;31:529-55.
  24. De Buitrago JG, Avila-Ortiz G, Elangovan S. Quality assessment of systematic reviews on alveolar ridge preservation. J Am Dent Assoc 2013;144:1349-57. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2013.0070
  25. Hammerle CH, Araujo MG, Simion MOsteology Consensus Group 2011. Evidence-based knowledge on the biology and treatment of extraction sockets. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23 Suppl 5:80-2. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02370.x

Cited by

  1. Comparative assessment of anterior maxillary alveolar ridge preservation with and without adjunctive use of enamel matrix derivative: A randomized clinical trial vol.31, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13530
  2. Alveolar ridge preservation with a collagen cone: Histological, histochemical, and immunohistochemical results of a randomized controlled clinical trial vol.6, pp.3, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1002/cre2.279
  3. An Overview of the Use of Equine Collagen as Emerging Material for Biomedical Applications vol.11, pp.4, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3390/jfb11040079
  4. Alveolar Ridge Preservation in the Esthetic Maxillary Zone: Tuberosity Punch Technique of Gingiva and Bone: A Pilot Study vol.22, pp.3, 2018, https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3049