Use of Sintered Xenograft Over Allograft for Ridge Augmentation: Technique Note

Block, Michael S.; Kaleem, Arshad

doi:10.1016/j.joms.2013.11.002

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Generally, autogenous bone was used as an inner layer in close contact with the implant; however, allogeneic bone was also used when autogenous bone harvest volume was not adequate [ 29 , 31 ]. In this study, an outer layer of ABBM was placed on the allograft to preserve and maintain the augmented bone, and a third layer of absorbable collagen membrane was placed to prevent the soft tissue and non-osteogenic cell invasion into the grafted site [ 4 , 30 ]. In view of the prerequisite of a barrier membrane, titanium mesh was used for space-making ability and stabilization of blood clots, and the overlying absorbable collagen membrane was used for cell occlusiveness to prevent the premature thinning of the overlying gingiva by separating the compartments completely for osseous and epithelial regeneration [ 15 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Innovative devices and technologies to reduce morbidity, biological, and surgical times are an intense research topic in implant dentistry [ 1 ], and guided bone regeneration (GBR) is a surgical procedure of bone augmentation for dental implants, using various bone grafting materials with concurrent barrier membranes [ 2 ]. Anorganic bovine bone materials (ABBMs) have been widely used as an osteoconductive material for sinus lift surgeries, ridge preservation, implant surgery immediately after tooth extraction, and GBR [ 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 ]. The unique advantage of ABBM is its own property of volume maintenance with slow substitution by the new bone compared to autogenous and allogeneic bone grafting material.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Materials 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 13 GBR [3][4][5][6][7]. The unique advantage of ABBM is its own property of volume maintenance with slow substitution by the new bone compared to autogenous and allogeneic bone grafting material.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Guided Bone Regeneration for Peri-Implant Dehiscence Defects with Two Anorganic Bovine Bone Materials Covered by Titanium Meshes

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study is to compare two low-temperature sintered anorganic bovine bone materials (ABBMs), Bio-Oss (Geistlich, Wolhusen, Switzerland) and A-Oss (Osstem, Seoul, Korea), for GBR in dehiscence defects. A single implant was placed simultaneously with GBR in the buccal or bucco-proximal osseous defect by double-layering of inner allograft and outer ABBM, covered by a preformed ultrafine titanium mesh and an absorbable collagen membrane. Grafted volume changes were evaluated by cone-beam computed tomography, taken preoperatively (T0), immediately after implant surgery (T1), after re-entry surgery (T2), and after delivery of the final restoration (T3). The density of the regenerated bone was assessed by measuring the probing depth on the buccal mid-center of the mesh after removing the mesh at T2. Postoperative sequelae were also recorded. Grafted volume shrinkage of 46.0% (0.78 ± 0.37 cc) and 40.8% (0.79 ± 0.33 cc) in the Bio-Oss group (8 patients) and A-Oss group (8 patients), respectively, was observed at T3 (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in grafted volume changes according to time periods or bone density between the two groups. Despite postoperative mesh exposure (3 patients), premature removal of these exposed meshes and additional grafting was not necessary, and all implants were functional over the 1-year follow-up period. Both ABBMs with titanium meshes showed no significant difference in the quantity and density of the regenerated bone after GBR for peri-implant defects.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Guided Bone Regeneration for Peri-Implant Dehiscence Defects with Two Anorganic Bovine Bone Materials Covered by Titanium Meshes

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Traditionally, autologous bone grafting was advocated as the gold standard for the reconstruction of edentulous ridges 1. However, advances in biomaterials and clinical techniques have led to the incorporation of bone substitutes (BSs) as an alternative 2–5…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Bacterial Growth in Unsealed Bone-grafting Products

Shmuly

Hater

Greenstein

et al. 2023

Journal of Craniofacial Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The aim of this study was to simulate reusing an opened package of bone substitute (BS) under typical clinical conditions, by analyzing bacterial growth in samples of resealed packages of alloplast and xenograft BS following different time periods up to a week. Materials and Methods: The experiment was performed in 2 stages: dry stage and wet stage. In the dry stage, BS samples were exposed to air for 15 minutes and then were sealed again in their original package. After several “aging” periods [no aging (t0), 24 hours (t1), and 1 week (t7)], BS samples were plated onto brain heart infusion agar and were incubated at 37 °C for 24 hours under aerobic conditions. Bacterial colonies were enumerated and colony forming units per 1 mL was calculated. In the wet stage, the experiment was repeated but BSs were left to age in a brain heart infusion broth to simulate a more supporting humid environment to encourage bacterial growth. Results: In the dry stage of the experiment, no bacterial growth was detected in both xenograft and alloplast samples (colony forming units/mL=0), in any of the time points (t0, t1, t7). In the wet stage, average bacterial growth was 0 for both groups in t0. In t1: 1.14 × 104±4.16 × 103 for the xenograft and 7.73 × 105± 9.99 × 105 for the alloplast. In t7: 1.64 × 109±1.82 × 108 in the xenograft compared with 8.86 × 108±4.00 × 108 for the alloplast. Analysis of variance with repeated measures showed a significant difference in comparison of the 2 BSs for each time group (t1 and t7) (P<0.005). Conclusion: Under dry conditions, in a resealed package, there was no bacterial growth for up to 1 week for both BSs. Once the BSs are introduced to a humid environment, which supports bacterial growth, the xenograft BS allowed more rapid bacterial growth, compared with the alloplastic BS.

show abstract

“…El material así obtenido se caracteriza por buena histocompatibilidad dado que la única proteína remanente es colágeno tipo I, buenas propiedades mecánicas, semejantes al hueso y buena capacidad osteoconductora por su similitud a la matriz inorgánica del hueso humano. 23,24,25,26 En trabajos previos hemos evaluado una forma de xenoinjerto de origen bovino en partículas. 17…”

Section: Hueso Heterólogounclassified

Estudio microbiológico en implantes inmediatos postexodoncia en alvéolos con lesiones periapicales

Luchetti¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

La colocación inmediata de implantes dentales postexodoncia en alvéolos infectados sigue siendo un tema controvertido en implantología oral. Objetivos: Evaluar los resultados de la colocación inmediata de implantes dentales en alvéolos infectados con respecto al nivel del hueso marginal y la estabilidad del implante en comparación con implantes colocados en los alvéolos sanos y evaluar un procedimiento de limpieza a fin de eliminar los microorganismos presentes en estas situaciones. Material y Métodos: Fueron seleccionados cincuenta (50) pacientes con dientes con infecciones crónicas que requieren extracción y recibieron 50 implantes dentales. (Grupo E). Todos los casos fueron dientes unirradiculares en el maxilar superior. Se evaluaron los aspectos microbiológicos y el procedimiento de limpieza tomando una secuencia de muestras para cultivos de la siguiente manera: 1-Muestra del fluido crevicular. 2- Muestra luego de la extracción del diente. 3- Muestra después del desbridamiento utilizando curetas manuales y 4- Muestra después de aplicar ácido cítrico al 2% durante 1 minuto. Después de esto, los implantes fueron colocados y se tomaron Valores Periotest (VPT) iniciales y el nivel de hueso marginal. A los 4 meses (segunda fase), antes de iniciar la parte protésica, se registraron nuevos valores Periotest y nivel de hueso marginal. Otros datos se obtuvieron a los 12 y 24 meses. Cincuenta implantes colocados en alvéolos sanos en cincuenta pacientes sirvieron como control. (Grupo C) Resultados: Se produjo un fracaso en cada grupo durante el período de evaluación. Los valores Periotest (VPT) promedio en el grupo E fueron: Inicial: -3,19 (0,66), 2da Fase: -3,77 (0,29), 12 meses: -3.89 (0,15) y 24 meses: -3,95 (0,12). Mientras que los valores Periotest promedio en el grupo E fueron: Inicial: -3,25 (0,90), 2da Fase: -3,91 (0,72), 12 meses: -3,99 (0,23) y 24 meses: -4,03 (0,27). No se encontraron diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre los grupos. El nivel óseo marginal fue considerado cero al inicio, con el fin de evaluar luego los cambios. El nivel óseo promedio, en milímetros, en el grupo E fue: 2da Fase: -0,21 (0,12), 12 meses: -0,52 (0,35) y 24 meses: -0,61 (0,24). El nivel óseo promedio, en milímetros, en el grupo C fue: 2da Fase: -0,18 (0,07), 12 meses: -0,55 (0,17) y 24 meses: -0,67 (0,23). No se encontraron diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre los grupos. Los microorganismos más comúnmente encontrados fueron Streptococos grupos C, H (S. sanguis) y K (S. salivarius), Staphylococcus aureus, Bacteroides forsythus and Fusobacterium nucleatum. También se observó Candida albicans en algunas muestras. Los antimicrobianos más eficaces fueron ciprofloxacina, amoxicilina más ácido clavulánico y metronidazol. Fluconazol fue el antimicótico más eficaz. El desbridamiento manual con curetas no fue capaz de producir una limpieza adecuada del alveolo. Sin embargo, la misma mejoró después de la aplicación de ácido cítrico al 2% como se demostró en los cultivos. Conclusiones: Dentro de las limitaciones del presente estudio, la colocación de implantes inmediatos en alvéolos infectados podría ser considerado un procedimiento predecible. No hubo diferencias estadísticamente significativas en comparación con los implantes colocados en los alvéolos sanos. El desbridamiento manual por sí solo no fue suficiente para realizar una limpieza adecuada. En este estudio, el ácido cítrico al 2% mostró resultados interesantes en cuanto a control microbiológico. Los Valores Periotest mejoraron durante los 2 años de seguimiento. El nivel del hueso marginal mostró una cierta pérdida, pero esta fue similar en ambos grupos.

show abstract

Use of Sintered Xenograft Over Allograft for Ridge Augmentation: Technique Note

Cited by 7 publications

References 26 publications

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Guided Bone Regeneration for Peri-Implant Dehiscence Defects with Two Anorganic Bovine Bone Materials Covered by Titanium Meshes

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Guided Bone Regeneration for Peri-Implant Dehiscence Defects with Two Anorganic Bovine Bone Materials Covered by Titanium Meshes

Bacterial Growth in Unsealed Bone-grafting Products

Estudio microbiológico en implantes inmediatos postexodoncia en alvéolos con lesiones periapicales

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About