Bone and soft tissue changes after alveolar ridge preservation using PRF socket plug technique versus socket plug technique: | ||
| Egyptian Dental Journal | ||
| Article 11, Volume 64, Issue 4 - October (Oral Surgery), October 2018, Pages 3195-3208 PDF (2.69 M) | ||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||
| DOI: 10.21608/edj.2018.78535 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Sherif Ali1; Khaled Selim2 | ||
| 1Lecturer, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt. | ||
| 2Lecturer, Oral Medicine and Periodontology Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt. | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Aim: The aim of this study was to compare platelet rich fibrin “PRF socket plug technique” versus the traditionally used “socket plug technique” to improve bone quality without affecting its volumetric stability. Research question: In mandibular premolars socket preservation, will “PRF socket plug” technique improve bone quality without affecting bone quantity, when compared to ‘socket plug” technique? Materials and Methods: This was a split-mouth randomized controlled trial conducted on 9 patients. For each patient, bilateral socket preservation was performed. PRF socket plug technique (intervention) was performed for one side, while the other was performed using the traditional socket plug technique (control). After 6 months, bone and soft tissue changes were measured. Horizontal and vertical alveolar ridge loss and loss percentage were measured using cone-beam CT. Bone quality was measured by histomorphometric analysis of area percentages of mineralized trabecular bone of core biopsies. Keratinized mucosa changes were measured using Williams graduated periodontal probe. Results: Intervention group showed slightly higher horizontal bone loss, loss percentage, vertical bone loss, loss percentage (1.36 mm, 16.98 %, 1.07mm, 7.99 %) with no statistically significant difference when compared to the control group (1.14mm, 13.89 %, 0.97 mm, 7.21 %). Histomorphometric analysis showed higher new bone formation (34.11 %) in intervention group compared to the control group (30.78%) with no statistically significant difference. Both groups showed keratinized mucosa gain (1.28 mm intervention, 1 mm control) with no statistically significant difference. Conclusions: Socket plug technique is an effective technique for alveolar ridge preservation; PRF clot represents an easy, successful, and economical method to cover the graft in socket plug technique; PRF socket plug technique represents a promising alternative to the routinely used socket plug technique. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Socket preservation; Socket plug technique; Xenograft; Platelet concentrates; Platelet rich fibrin | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 184 PDF Download: 599 |
||
