Clinical oral investigations · 2022
Development of root resorption during orthodontic tooth movement after cleft repair using different grafting materials in rats.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Möhlhenrich Stephan Christian, Kniha Kristian, Magnuska Zuzanna, Chhatwani Sachin, Hermanns-Sachweh Benita, Gremse Felix, Hölzle Frank, Danesh Gholamreza, Modabber Ali
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to investigate the influence of three grafting materials for cleft repair on orthodontic tooth movement in rats.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Artificial alveolar clefts were created in 21 Wistar rats and were repaired 4 weeks later using autografts, human xenografts and synthetic bone substitute (beta-tricalcium phosphate/hydroxyapatite [β-TCP/HA]). A further 4 weeks later, the first molar was moved into the reconstructed maxilla. Microfocus computed tomography (μCT) was performed six times (T0-T5) to assess the tooth movement and root resorption. After 8 weeks, the affected reconstructed jaw was resected for histopathological investigation.
RESULTS: Total distances reached ranged from 0.82 ± 0.72 mm (β-TCP/HA) to 0.67 ± 0.27 mm (autograft). The resorption was particularly determined at the mesiobuccal root. Descriptive tooth movement slowed and root resorption increased slightly. However, neither the radiological changes during tooth movement (µCT T1 vs. µCT T5: autograft 1.85 ± 0.39 mm3 vs. 2.38 ± 0.35 mm3, p = 0.30; human xenograft 1.75 ± 0.45 mm3 vs. 2.17 ± 0.26 mm3, p = 0.54; β-TCP/HA: 1.52 ± 0.42 mm3 vs. 1.88 ± 0.41 mm3, p = 0.60) nor the histological differences after tooth movement (human xenograft: 0.078 ± 0.05 mm2; β-TCP/HA: 0.067 ± 0.049 mm2; autograft: 0.048 ± 0.015 mm2) were statistically significant.
CONCLUSION: The autografts, human xenografts or synthetic bone substitute used for cleft repair seem to have a similar effect on the subsequent orthodontic tooth movement and the associated root resorptions.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Development of root resorptions seems to have a secondary role in choosing a suitable grafting material for cleft repair.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Artificial alveolar clefts were created in 21 Wistar rats and were repaired 4 weeks later using autografts, human xenografts and synthetic bone substitute (beta-tricalcium phosphate/hydroxyapatite [β-TCP/HA]). A further 4 weeks later, the first molar was moved into the reconstructed maxilla. Microfocus computed tomography (μCT) was performed six times (T0-T5) to assess the tooth movement and root resorption. After 8 weeks, the affected reconstructed jaw was resected for histopathological investigation.
RESULTS: Total distances reached ranged from 0.82 ± 0.72 mm (β-TCP/HA) to 0.67 ± 0.27 mm (autograft). The resorption was particularly determined at the mesiobuccal root. Descriptive tooth movement slowed and root resorption increased slightly. However, neither the radiological changes during tooth movement (µCT T1 vs. µCT T5: autograft 1.85 ± 0.39 mm3 vs. 2.38 ± 0.35 mm3, p = 0.30; human xenograft 1.75 ± 0.45 mm3 vs. 2.17 ± 0.26 mm3, p = 0.54; β-TCP/HA: 1.52 ± 0.42 mm3 vs. 1.88 ± 0.41 mm3, p = 0.60) nor the histological differences after tooth movement (human xenograft: 0.078 ± 0.05 mm2; β-TCP/HA: 0.067 ± 0.049 mm2; autograft: 0.048 ± 0.015 mm2) were statistically significant.
CONCLUSION: The autografts, human xenografts or synthetic bone substitute used for cleft repair seem to have a similar effect on the subsequent orthodontic tooth movement and the associated root resorptions.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Development of root resorptions seems to have a secondary role in choosing a suitable grafting material for cleft repair.