Soft tissue outcomes following alveolar ridge preservation with/without primary flap closure for periodontally damaged extraction socket: A randomized clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: The changes in soft tissue profile following alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) with/without primary flap closure (PC) in periodontally damaged sockets have yet to be discovered. METHODS: For periodontally damaged non-molar extraction sockets, ARP with PC (group PC)/without PC (group SC) was performed using granule-type xenogeneic bone substitute material and a collagen barrier. Intraoral scans were performed at the time of ARP and 4 months thereafter. Superimposition of STL files was performed to examine tissue change on the soft tissue level. The level of mucogingival junction (MGJ) was also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 28 patient (13 in group PC, 15 in group SC) completed the study. Soft tissue profile change was evaluated only when the measurement level was located on the non-mobile tissue. Group PC tended to shrink less on the long axis of the extraction socket than group SC (-4.3 ± 3.1 mm vs. -5.9 ± 4.4 mm at the 1 mm below the pre-extraction gingival margin, p > 0.05). Profilometric analysis (on the region of interest) also have a tendency of less tissue profile change in group PC than group SC (-1.0 ± 0.8 mm vs. -1.3 ± 0.5 mm, p > 0.05). The MGJ level change was not statistically significantly different between the groups (p > 0.05) even though the MGJ level was located more apically at 4 months in group SC compared with group PC. CONCLUSIONS: Alveolar ridge preservation with PC tended to yield less soft tissue shrinkage than ARP without PC.

Primary flap closure in alveolar ridge preservation for periodontally damaged extraction socket: A randomized clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: The effect of primary wound closure (PC) on alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) in periodontally damaged sockets has yet to be fully discovered. METHODS: Periodontally damaged sockets were allocated to one of the following groups: (1) ARP with PC (group PC), and (2) ARP without PC (group secondary wound closure [SC]). Following tooth extraction and flap elevation, granule-type xenogeneic bone substitute material and a collagen barrier were applied. Ridge change was evaluated using cone-beam computed tomographic (CBCT) scans immediately after ARP and at 4 months. Core biopsy specimens were examined histomorphometrically. RESULTS: A total of 28 patients were included in the analysis (13 in group PC, 15 in group SC). Histomorphometrically, the percentage of newly formed bone was 26.2 ± 17.7% and 24.6 ± 18.4% in groups PC and SC, respectively (independent t-test, degree of freedom [df] = 25, p > 0.05). Horizontal ridge changes on CBCT were -4.9 ± 3.1 mm and - 4.2 ± 2.5 mm in groups PC and SC at the 1 mm level below the ridge crest, respectively (independent t-test, df = 26, p > 0.05). Approximately half of the sites required additional bone augmentation at implant placement. CONCLUSIONS: ARP with/without PC yielded similar new bone formation and radiographic ridge change. This clinical trial was not registered prior to participant recruitment and randomization (https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/search/detailSearch.do/19718).