Effect of flapless ridge preservation with two different alloplastic materials in sockets with buccal dehiscence defects—volumetric and linear changes
To test whether or not one out of two alloplastic materials used for ridge preservation (RP) is superior to the other in terms of volumetric and linear ridge changes over time.
Materials and methods
In 16 adult beagle dogs, the distal roots of P3 and P4 were extracted and 50% of the buccal bone plate removed. Ridge preservation was performed randomly using two different alloplastic bone grafting substitutes (poly lactic-co-glycolic acid (PLGA) coated biphasic calcium phosphate particles consisting of 60% hydroxyapatite (HA) and 40% beta-tricalcium phosphate (ß-TCP=test 1), (a biphasic calcium phosphate consisting 60% HA and 40% ß-TCP=test 2) and a resorbable collagen membrane or a control group (sham). Sacrifice was performed at three time-points (4, 8, 16 weeks later). Impressions were taken before extraction, after RP, and at sacrifice, allowing for assessment of volumetric changes. A multi-way ANOVA was computed, and partial Type-II F tests were performed.
Both ridge preservation procedures minimized the volume loss compared to spontaneous healing. The median buccal volume changes between pre-extraction and sacrifice were − 1.76 mm (Q1 = − 2.56; Q3 = − 1.42) for test 1, − 1.62 mm (Q1 = − 2.06; Q3 = − 1.38) for test 2, and − 2.42 mm (Q1 = − 2.63; Q3 = − 2.03) for control. The mean ridge width measurements did not show statistically significant differences between test 1 (− 2.51 mm; Q1 = − 3.25; Q3 = − 1.70) and test 2 (− 2.04 mm; Q1 = − 3.82; Q3 = − 1.81) (p = 0.813), but between test and control (− 3.85 mm; Q1 = − 5.02; Q3 = − 3.27) (p = 0.003).
Both RP techniques were successful in maintaining the buccal contour from pre-extraction to sacrifice to a similar extent and more favorable compared to spontaneous healing.
Alloplastic materials can successfully be used for RP procedures.
KeywordsRidge preservation Volume stability Alveolar ridge augmentation (MeSH)
The authors would like to acknowledge Dr. M. Mayer, for his support in the statistical analysis of the data and the animal care team at NAMSA, Lyon, France, for assistance during surgery. The support and expertise of Dr. Lorenz Uebersax, Sunstar Suisse SA, Etoy, Switzerland, is highly appreciated. This study was funded by Sunstar Suisse SA, Etoy, Switzerland and the Clinic of Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Material Science, Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
The work was supported by Sunstar Suisse SA, Etoy, Switzerland and the Clinic of Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Material Science, Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.
For this type of study, formal consent is not required.
- 8.Barone A, Orlando B, Cingano L, Marconcini S, Derchi G, Covani U (2012) A randomized clinical trial to evaluate and compare implants placed in augmented versus non-augmented extraction sockets: 3-year results. J Periodontol 83(7):836–846. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2011.110205 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 9.Barone A, Ricci M, Tonelli P, Santini S, Covani U (2013) Tissue changes of extraction sockets in humans: a comparison of spontaneous healing vs. ridge preservation with secondary soft tissue healing. Clin Oral Implants Res 24:1231–1237. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02535.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 10.Barone A, Toti P, Quaranta A, Alfonsi F, Cucchi A, Calvo-Guirado JL, Negri B, Di Felice R, Covani U (2015) Volumetric analysis of remodelling pattern after ridge preservation comparing use of two types of xenografts. A multicentre randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 27(11):e105–e115. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12572 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 13.Dahlin C, Obrecht M, Dard M, Donos N (2015) Bone tissue modelling and remodelling following guided bone regeneration in combination with biphasic calcium phosphate materials presenting different microporosity. Clin Oral Implants Res 26(7):814–822. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12361 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 14.Froum S, Orlowski W (2000) Ridge preservation utilizing an alloplast prior to implant placement—clinical and histological case reports. Pract Periodontics and Aesthet Dent 12:393–402 quiz 404Google Scholar
- 15.Froum SJ, Wallace SS, Cho SC, Elian N, Tarnow DP (2008) Histomorphometric comparison of a biphasic bone ceramic to anorganic bovine bone for sinus augmentation: 6- to 8-month postsurgical assessment of vital bone formation. A pilot study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 28(3):273–281PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 17.Jensen SS, Bornstein MM, Dard M, Bosshardt DD, Buser D (2009) Comparative study of biphasic calcium phosphates with different HA/TCP ratios in mandibular bone defects. A long-term histomorphometric study in minipigs. J Biomed Mater Res Part B Appl Biomater 90(1):171–181. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.b.31271 PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 18.Jung, R. (2017) Alveolar ridge preservation in the esthetic zone. Perio 2000 acceptedGoogle Scholar
- 19.Jung RE, Philipp A, Annen BM, Signorelli L, Thoma DS, Hammerle CH, Attin T, Schmidlin P (2013) Radiographic evaluation of different techniques for ridge preservation after tooth extraction: a randomized controlled clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol 40(1):90–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12027 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 21.Kim JJ, Schwarz F, Song HY, Choi Y, Kang KR, Koo KT (2016) Ridge preservation of extraction sockets with chronic pathology using Bio-Oss(R) Collagen with or without collagen membrane: an experimental study in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 28(6):727–733. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12870 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 24.Mardas N, Trullenque-Eriksson A, MacBeth N, Petrie A, Donos N (2015) Does ridge preservation following tooth extraction improve implant treatment outcomes: a systematic review: group 4: therapeutic concepts & methods. Clin Oral Implants Res 26(Suppl 11):180–201. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12639 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 25.Rothamel D, Schwarz F, Herten M, Engelhardt E, Donath K, Kuehn P, Becker J (2008) Dimensional ridge alterations following socket preservation using a nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite paste: a histomorphometrical study in dogs. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 37(8):741–747. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2008.04.017 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 26.Scheyer ET, Heard R, Janakievski J, Mandelaris G, Nevins ML, Pickering SR, Richardson CR, Pope B, Toback G, Velasquez D, Nagursky H (2016) A randomized, controlled, multicentre clinical trial of post-extraction alveolar ridge preservation. J Clin Periodontol 43(12):1188–1199. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12623 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 27.Schneider D, Schmidlin PR, Philipp A, Annen BM, Ronay V, Hammerle CH, Attin T, Jung RE (2014) Labial soft tissue volume evaluation of different techniques for ridge preservation after tooth extraction: a randomized controlled clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol 41(6):612–617. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12246 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 30.Sisti A, Canullo L, Mottola MP, Covani U, Barone A, Botticelli D (2012) Clinical evaluation of a ridge augmentation procedure for the severely resorbed alveolar socket: multicenter randomized controlled trial, preliminary results. Clin Oral Implants Res 23(5):526–535. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02386.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 31.Spinato S, Galindo-Moreno P, Zaffe D, Bernardello F, Soardi CM (2014) Is socket healing conditioned by buccal plate thickness? A clinical and histologic study 4 months after mineralized human bone allografting. Clin Oral Implants Res 25(2):e120–e126. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12073 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 34.Thoma DS, Jung RE, Schneider D, Cochran DL, Ender A, Jones AA, Gorlach C, Uebersax L, Graf-Hausner U, Hammerle CH (2010) Soft tissue volume augmentation by the use of collagen-based matrices: a volumetric analysis. J Clin Periodontol 37(7):659–666. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2010.01581.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar