18 130

Cited 0 times in

In vivo experimental study comparing alveolar ridge preservation versus guided bone regeneration after unassisted socket healing at intact and damaged sites in narrow alveolar ridges

Authors
 Hae Jee Shin  ;  Jin-Young Park  ;  Hsu Kuo Tien  ;  Franz-Josef Strauss  ;  Jae-Kook Cha  ;  Jung-Seok Lee 
Citation
 JOURNAL OF PERIODONTOLOGY, Vol.96(3) : 279-289, 2025-03 
Journal Title
JOURNAL OF PERIODONTOLOGY
ISSN
 0022-3492 
Issue Date
2025-03
MeSH
Alveolar Bone Loss* / surgery ; Alveolar Process* / pathology ; Alveolar Process* / surgery ; Alveolar Ridge Augmentation* / methods ; Animals ; Bone Regeneration* / physiology ; Bone Substitutes / therapeutic use ; Dental Implantation, Endosseous / methods ; Dental Implants ; Dogs ; Follow-Up Studies ; Guided Tissue Regeneration, Periodontal* / methods ; Male ; Mandible / pathology ; Mandible / surgery ; Osteogenesis / physiology ; Tooth Extraction ; Tooth Socket* / pathology ; Tooth Socket* / surgery ; Wound Healing / physiology
Keywords
alveolar ridge augmentation ; animal model ; bone regeneration ; bone substitutes ; tooth extraction
Abstract
Background: To compare bone regeneration and dimensional alteration of alveolar ridge at intact and damaged extraction sockets after alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) and implant placement versus unassisted socket healing followed by guided bone regeneration (GBR) with simultaneous implant placement.

Methods: In 6 beagle dogs, 3 types of extraction sockets in the mandible were created: (1) intact sockets, (2) 1-wall defect sockets and (3) 2-wall defect sockets. The sockets were allocated to undergo either (1) ARP and implant placement 8 weeks later (ARP group) or (2) GBR with simultaneous implant placement after 8 weeks of unassisted socket healing (GBR group). After an additional healing period of 8 weeks, bone regeneration and dimensional changes were evaluated radiographically and histologically.

Results: GBR showed superior bone formation and greater bone gains compared to ARP, regardless of the initial extraction-socket configuration. Although ARP maintained the preexisting alveolar ridge dimensions, peri-implant bone defects were still detected at 10 weeks of follow-up. Histomorphometric analyses confirmed that GBR increased dimensions of the alveolar ridge compared to baseline, and the augmentation and bone regeneration were greater with GBR than with ARP.

Conclusion: Early implant placement with ARP can mitigate alveolar ridge changes in the narrow alveolar ridge. However, early implant placement with simultaneous GBR creates the conditions for enhanced bone regeneration around the implant and greater ridge augmentation compared to ARP, irrespective of the extraction-socket configuration.
Files in This Item:
T202502981.pdf Download
DOI
10.1002/JPER.24-0125
Appears in Collections:
2. College of Dentistry (치과대학) > Dept. of Periodontics (치주과학교실) > 1. Journal Papers
Yonsei Authors
Park, Jin Young(박진영)
Lee, Jung Seok(이중석) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1276-5978
Cha, Jae Kook(차재국) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6817-9834
URI
https://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/206009
사서에게 알리기
  feedback

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse

Links