Clinical, Histologic and Histomorphometric Evaluation of Bone Strip Allograft with Resorbable Membrane in Horizontal Alveolar Ridge Augmentation: A Preliminary Study
Journal of Dental School, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences,
Vol. 32 No. 2 (2014),
13 March 2019
,
Page 80-89
https://doi.org/10.22037/jds.v32i2.24801
Abstract
Objective: Alveolar ridge preservation in patients with inadequate bone volume is one treatment option for successful implant placement and can be done by using bone graft materials. On the other hand, Ceno Bone has been recently produced by Hamanand Saz Baft Kish Co. as a bone bioimplant of allograft origin. This study aimed to assess the clinical, histologic and histomorphometric results of Bone Strip Allograft (CenoBone) for horizontal alveolar ridge augmentation.
Methods: In this semi-experimental clinical trial, 7 areas requiring horizontal ridge augmentation and subsequent implant placement in the maxilla were selected using non-randomized consecutive sampling. Surgeries were mostly performed via the buccal cortical plate of the edentulous ridge. The buccal bone was decorticated, Ceno Bone was fixed by titanium screws, covered with Ceno Membrane (resorbable) and sutured. Buccolingual width of the ridge was measured in stage-one surgery and six months later in stage-two surgery for implant placement. A core biopsy was also taken to assess the trabecular thickness, percentage of new bone formation, percentage of remnant particles, degree of inflammation, foreign body reaction, vitality, bone-biomaterial contact and number of blood vessels by microscopic, histologic and histomorphometric analyses of the slides. The clinical ridge width values in the first- and second-stage surgeries were analyzed using Wilcoxon Signed Rank test.
Results: The mean clinical ridge width at 2mm distance from the ridge crest was 2.49 (0.72) mm in the first-stage and 4.79 (0.75) mm in the second-stage surgery. The mean clinical ridge width at 5mm distance from the ridge crest was 3.6 (0.57) mm in the first-stage and 6.3 (1.13) mm in the second-stage surgery. At both sites, application of Ceno Bone significantly increased the clinical ridge width in the second-stage surgery (both ps<0.05). Also, inflammation in most specimens (85.7%) was grade I and no case of foreign body reaction was seen. Bone was vital in all patients. The mean trabecular thickness was 87.96 (38.74)μ. The percentage of new bone formation was
58.43 (26.42%) and the percentage of remnant particles was 4.07% (2.44%).
Conclusion: The results of this preliminary study revealed that application of CenoBone stimulates osteogenesis and significantly increases the clinical ridge width at 2 and 5mm distances from the ridge crest for implant placement.
- Ceno Bone
- Clinical
- Horizontal augmentation
- Osteogenesis
- Ridge
- Width
How to Cite
References
Bartee BK. Extraction site reconstruction for alveolar ridge preservation. Part 1: rationale and materials selection. J Oral Implantol 2001; 27: 187-193.
Shi B, Zhou Y, Wang YN, Cheng XR. Alveolar ridge preservation prior to implant placement with surgical-grade calcium sulfate and platelet–rich plasma: a pilot study in a canine model. Int J Oral Maxillfac Implants 2007; 22: 656-665.
Schmidlin PR, Jung RE, Schug J. Prevention of alveolar ridge resorption after tooth extraction- a review. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 2004; 114: 328-336.
Jensen SS, Broggini N, Hjørting–Hansen E, Schenk R, Buser D. Bone healing and graft resorption of autograft, anorganic bovine bone and Beta–tricalcium phosphate. A histologic and histomorphometric study in the mandibles of minipigs. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006; 17: 237- 243.
Lindhe J, Lang NP, Karring T. Clinical Periodontology and Implant Dentistry. 5th Ed. Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2008; Chap 25: 551-552.
Urist MR, Strates BS. Bone formation in implants of partially and wholly demineralized bone matrix including observations on acetone–fixed intra and extracellular proteins. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1970; 71: 271-278.
Sarkarat F, Sadri D, Bohlooli B, Lozani S. Ridge preservation with OSSEO+ compared to Cenobone for implant site development: a clinical and histologic study in humans. J Res Dent Sci 2010; 7: 1-6.
Nissan J, Marilena V, Gross O, Mardinger O, Chaushu G. Histomorphometric analysis following augmentation of the anterior atrophic maxilla with cancellous bone block allograft. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2012; 27: 84-89.
Chaushu G, Vered M, Mardinger O, Nissan J. Histomorphometric analysis after maxillary sinus floor augmentation using cancellous bone-block allograft. J Periodontol 2010; 81: 1147-1152.
Hasheminia SM, Feizi G, Razavi SM, Feizianfard M, Gutknecht N, Mir M. A comparative study of three treatment methods of direct pulp capping in canine teeth of cats: histologic evaluation. Lasers Med Sci 2010; 25: 9-15.
Toscano N, Holtzclaw D, Mazor Z, Rosen P, Horowitz R, Toffler M. Horizontal ridge augmentation utilizing a composite graft of demineralized freeze-dried allograft, mineralized cortical cancellous chips, and a biologically degradable thermoplastic carrier combined with a resorbable membrane: a Retrospective evaluation of 73 consecutively treated cases from private practices. J Oral Implantol 2010; 36: 467-474.
Geurs NC, Korostoff JM, Vassilopoulos PJ, Kang TH, Jeffcoat M, Kellar R, et al. Clinical and histologic assessment of lateral alveolar ridge augmentation using a synthetic long-term bioabsorbable membrane and an allograft. J Periodontol 2008; 79: 1133-1140.
Peleg M, Sawatari Y, Marx RN, Santoro J, Cohen J, Bejarano P, et al. Use of corticocancellous allogeneic bone blocks for augmentation of alveolar bone defects. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010; 25: 153-162.
Mellonig JT, Bowers GM, Bailey RC. Comparison of bone graft materials. Part I. New bone formation with autografts and allografts determined by Strontium – 85. J Periodontol 1981; 52: 291-296.
Tadjoedin ES, de Lange GL, Holzmann PJ, Kulper L, Burger EH. Histological observations on biopsies harvested following sinus floor elevation using a bioactive glass material of narrow size range. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000; 11: 334-344.
Cammack GV 2nd, Nevins M, Clem DS 3rd, Hatch JP, Mellonig JT. Histologic evaluation of mineralized and demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft for ridge and sinus augmentations. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2005; 25: 231-237.
Strietzel FP, Reichart PA, Graf HL. Lateral alveolar ridge augmentation using a synthetic nano- crystalline hydroxyapatite bone substitution material (Ostim). Preliminary clinical and histological results. Clin Oral Implants Res 2007; 18: 743-751.
Wood RA, Mealey BL. Histologic comparison of healing after tooth extraction with ridge preservation using mineralized versus demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft. J Periodontol 2012; 83: 329-336.
Schwartz Z, Somers A, Mellonig JT, Carnes DL Jr, Dean DD, Cochran DL, et al. Ability of commercial demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft to induce new bone formation is dependent on donor age but not gender. J Periodontol 1998; 69: 470-478.
Shigeyama Y, D'Errico JA, Stone R, Somerman MJ. Commercially-prepared allograft material has biological activity in vitro. J Periodontol 1995; 66: 478-487.
Nouri Moghehi MH, Mahmoudzadeh Sagheb HR, Heidari Z. Practical methods and specialist vocabulary for histotechnic, steriology and morphometri. 1st Ed. Tehran: Tehran University of Medical Sciences Publishing Co. 2004; Chap 7: 176-179. [Persian]
Toloue SM, Chesnoiu-Matei I, Blanchard SB. A clinical and histomorphometric study of calcium sulfate compared with freeze-dried bone allograft for alveolar ridge preservation. J Periodontol 2012; 83: 847-855.
von Arx T, Buser D. Horizontal ridge augmentation using autogenous block grafts and the guided bone regeneration technique with collagen membranes: a clinical study with 42 patients. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006; 17: 359–366.
- Abstract Viewed: 141 times
- PDF Downloaded: 61 times