Clinical oral implants research · 2007
Bone regeneration of dental implant dehiscence defects using a cultured periosteum membrane.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Mizuno Daiki, Kagami Hideaki, Mizuno Hirokazu, Mase Junji, Usami Kazutada, Ueda Minoru
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of a cultured periosteum (CP) membrane for use in guided bone regeneration at sites of implant dehiscence.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Four healthy beagle dogs were used in this study. Implant dehiscence defects (4 x 4 x 3 mm) were surgically created at mandibular premolar sites where premolars had been extracted 3 months back. Dental implants (3.75 mm in diameter and 7 mm in length) with machined surfaces were placed into the defect sites (14 implants in total). Each dehiscence defective implant was randomly assigned to one of the following two groups: (1) PRP gel without cells (control) or (2) a periosteum membrane cultured on PRP gel (experimental). Dogs were killed 12 weeks after operation and nondecalcified histological sections were made for histomorphometric analyses including percent linear bone fill (LF) and bone-to-implant contact (BIC).
RESULTS: Bone regeneration in the treatment group with a CP membrane was significantly greater than that in the control group and was confirmed by LF analysis. LF values in the experimental and the control groups were 72.36+/-3.14% and 37.03+/-4.63%, respectively (P<0.05). The BIC values in both groups were not significantly different from each other. The BIC values in the experimental and the control groups were 40.76+/-10.30% and 30.58+/-9.69%, respectively (P=0.25) and were similar to native bone.
CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated the feasibility of a CP membrane to regenerate bone at implant dehiscence defect.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Four healthy beagle dogs were used in this study. Implant dehiscence defects (4 x 4 x 3 mm) were surgically created at mandibular premolar sites where premolars had been extracted 3 months back. Dental implants (3.75 mm in diameter and 7 mm in length) with machined surfaces were placed into the defect sites (14 implants in total). Each dehiscence defective implant was randomly assigned to one of the following two groups: (1) PRP gel without cells (control) or (2) a periosteum membrane cultured on PRP gel (experimental). Dogs were killed 12 weeks after operation and nondecalcified histological sections were made for histomorphometric analyses including percent linear bone fill (LF) and bone-to-implant contact (BIC).
RESULTS: Bone regeneration in the treatment group with a CP membrane was significantly greater than that in the control group and was confirmed by LF analysis. LF values in the experimental and the control groups were 72.36+/-3.14% and 37.03+/-4.63%, respectively (P<0.05). The BIC values in both groups were not significantly different from each other. The BIC values in the experimental and the control groups were 40.76+/-10.30% and 30.58+/-9.69%, respectively (P=0.25) and were similar to native bone.
CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated the feasibility of a CP membrane to regenerate bone at implant dehiscence defect.