Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Radiographic changes after alveolar ridge preservation using autogenous raw tooth particles versus xenograft: A prospective controlled clinical trial.
Mahardawi, Basel; Damrongsirirat, Napat; Dhanesuan, Kanit; Subbalekha, Keskanya; Mattheos, Nikos; Pimkhaokham, Atiphan.
Affiliation
  • Mahardawi B; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
  • Damrongsirirat N; Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Digital Implant Surgery Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
  • Dhanesuan K; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
  • Subbalekha K; Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Digital Implant Surgery Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
  • Mattheos N; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
  • Pimkhaokham A; Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Digital Implant Surgery Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39132806
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

The use of extracted teeth has been introduced as an option for bone grafting. However, the current method requires special machines and solutions, posing significant time and cost. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of autogenous raw tooth particles (RTP), a grafting material made from a ground tooth using basic equipment, for alveolar ridge preservation. MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

Twenty-three patients (12 study/11 control), having 14 and 13 sites were included for the study and control groups (commercially available xenograft), respectively. Radiographic measurements were taken at the baseline and the 4-month follow-up appointment. Furthermore, a questionnaire survey concerning the general preference of the type of graft to receive (if needed), before and after knowing the price, was distributed at the completion of the procedure for patients to answer.

RESULTS:

Alveolar ridge width change was -1.03 ± 0.64 and -0.84 ± 0.35 for the study and the control groups, respectively. Regarding the height, the study group showed a buccal and lingual change of -0.66 ± 0.48 and -0.78 ± 0.81, respectively, while this was -0.78 ± 0.56 and -0.9 ± 0.41 for the xenograft group. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups. Patients preferred the raw tooth particles over other grafting materials (p = .01).

CONCLUSION:

No core biopsies were taken to evaluate bone formation, which should be done in future studies. Within its limitations, the current study demonstrated that RTP graft could be an alternative graft for bone augmentation, offering a new cost-effective option for clinicians when available.
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: Clin Oral Implants Res Journal subject: ODONTOLOGIA Year: 2024 Type: Article Affiliation country: Thailand

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: Clin Oral Implants Res Journal subject: ODONTOLOGIA Year: 2024 Type: Article Affiliation country: Thailand