Radiological evaluation of mandibular alveolar reconstruction after retained third molar removal procedures using autogenous dentin matrix (ADM)

• Autorzy: Kubaszek Bartłomiej , Kiełboń Agnieszka , Kasprzyk-Kucewicz Teresa , Starosta Martin , Krynicki Paweł , Morawiec Tadeusz

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.2478/pjmpe-2024-0010

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Introduction: Bone regeneration materials are often used in dental surgery procedures. At present, we have the possibility to use materials from different groups due to the way they are obtained. The gold standard still remains the use of autogenous bone substitute material due to its osteogenic, osteoinductive and osteoconductive properties. The surgical removal of the third retained tooth is one of the most common procedures performed in dental surgery. As a result of such a procedure, bone tissue atrophy occurs. In order to avoid the formation of a bone defect on the distal surface of the second molar, an augmentation method using an autogenous dentin matrix can be used in such procedures. Material and methods: Procedures for bilateral removal of retained third molars were performed in 15 patients. On one side, augmentation was performed with an autogenous dentin matrix obtained by grinding and preparing the extracted retained tooth (study group). On the opposite side, the bone defect was left to heal spontaneously (control group). After 6 months, the degree of bone regeneration was compared on the basis of bone density testing and the size of the resulting bone defect on the distal side was compared on the basis of radiographic examination. Results: Analysis of the obtained material showed significant differences in healing after treatments with autogenous dentin matrix. Thus, the use of an autogenous dentin matrix made it possible to obtain a completely regenerated bone defect. Conclusions: This procedure seems to be useful for bone regeneration after the removal of the third molar.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

biomedical engineering; augmentation; third molar extraction; autogenous dentin graft

• Wydawca: Polskie Towarzystwo Fizyki Medycznej ; De Gruyter
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Medical Physics and Engineering
• Rocznik: 2024
• Tom: Vol. 30, Iss. 2
• Strony: 90--98
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 31 poz., rys.

Twórcy

autor

Kubaszek Bartłomiej

• Doctoral School, Department of Oral Surgery, Division of Medical Sciences in Zabrze, Medical University of Silesia, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7760-2590

autor

Kiełboń Agnieszka

• Faculty of Science and Technology, University of Silesia in Katowice, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0009-0004-9112-1525

autor

Kasprzyk-Kucewicz Teresa

• Faculty of Science and Technology, University of Silesia in Katowice, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1325-0098

autor

Starosta Martin

• Department of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine,, University of Ostrava, Czech Republic

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6843-349X

autor

Krynicki Paweł

• Department of Oral Surgery, Division of Medical Sciences in Zabrze, Medical University of Silesia, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0009-0002-2991-8643

autor

Morawiec Tadeusz

• Department of Oral Surgery, Division of Medical Sciences in Zabrze, Medical University of Silesia, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2283-5784

Bibliografia

• 1. Krausz AA, Machtei EE, Peled M. Effects of lower third molar extraction on attachment level and alveolar bone height of the adjacent second molar. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005;34(7):756-760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2005.02.006
• 2. Kugelberg CF. Impacted lower third molars and periodontal health. An epidemiological, methodological, retrospective and prospective clinical, study. Swed Dent J Suppl. 1990;68:1-52.
• 3. Ash MM, Costich ER, Hayward JR. A study of periodontal hazards of third molars. J Periodontol. 1962;33(3):209-219. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1962.33.3.209
• 4. Goodsell JF. An overview of the third molar problem. Quintessence Int Dent Dig. 1977;8(10):11-18.
• 5. Kugelberg CF. Periodontal healing two and four years after impacted lower third molar surgery. A comparative retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1990;19(6):341-345. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0901-5027(05)80077-3
• 6. Coleman M, McCormick A, Laskin DM. The incidence of periodontal defects distal to the maxillary second molar after impacted third molar extraction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011;69(2):319-321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2010.10.011
• 7. Peng KY, Tseng YC, Shen EC, Chiu SC, Fu E, Huang YW. Mandibular second molar periodontal status after third molar extraction. J Periodontol. 2001;72(12):1647-1651. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2001.72.12.1647
• 8. Sammartino G, Tia M, Bucci T, Wang HL. Prevention of mandibular third molar extraction-associated periodontal defects: a comparative study. J Periodontol. 2009;80(3):389-396. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2009.080503
• 9. Barbato L, Kalemaj Z, Buti J, et al. Effect of Surgical Intervention for Removal of Mandibular Third Molar on Periodontal Healing of Adjacent Mandibular Second Molar: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis. J Periodontol. 2016;87(3):291-302. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2015.150363
• 10. Moussa NT, Dym H. Maxillofacial Bone Grafting Materials. Dent Clin North Am. 2020;64(2):473-490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2019.12.011
• 11. Hassan KS, Marei HF, Alagl AS. Does grafting of third molar extraction sockets enhance periodontal measures in 30- to 35-year-old patients?. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;70(4):757-764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2011.09.010
• 12. Wu D, Zhou L, Lin J, Chen J, Huang W, Chen Y. Immediate implant placement in anterior teeth with grafting material of autogenous tooth bone vs xenogenic bone. BMC Oral Health. 2019;19(1):266. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-019-0970-7
• 13. Kumar V, Rattan V, Rai S, Singh SP, Mahajan JK. Comparative Assessment of Autogenous Cancellous Bone Graft and Bovine-Derived Demineralized Bone Matrix for Secondary Alveolar Bone Grafting in Patients With Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2022;59(7):833-840. https://doi.org/10.1177/10556656211025197
• 14. Mahardawi B, Jiaranuchart S, Tompkins KA, Pimkhaokham A. Efficacy of the autogenous dentin graft for implant placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2023;52(5):604-612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2022.10.014
• 15. Santos A, Botelho J, Machado V, et al. Autogenous Mineralized Dentin versus Xenograft granules in Ridge Preservation for Delayed Implantation in Post-extraction Sites: A Randomized controlled clinical trial with an 18 months follow-up. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2021;32(8):905-915. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13765
• 16. Li P, Zhu H, Huang D. Autogenous DDM versus Bio-Oss granules in GBR for immediate implantation in periodontal postextraction sites: A prospective clinical study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2018;20(6):923-928. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12667
• 17. Del Canto-Díaz A, de Elío-Oliveros J, Del Canto-Díaz M, Alobera-Gracia MA, Del Canto-Pingarrón M, Martínez-González JM. Use of autologous tooth-derived graft material in the post-extraction dental socket. Pilot study. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2019;24(1):e53-e60. https://doi.org/10.4317/medoral.22536
• 18. Sánchez-Labrador L, Martín-Ares M, Ortega-Aranegui R, López-Quiles J, Martínez-González JM. Autogenous Dentin Graft in Bone Defects after Lower Third Molar Extraction: A Split-Mouth Clinical Trial. Materials (Basel). 2020;13(14):3090. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13143090
• 19. Leung WK, Theilade E, Comfort MB, Lim PL. Microbiology of the pericoronal pouch in mandibular third molar pericoronitis. Oral Microbiol Immunol. 1993;8(5):306-312. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-302x.1993.tb00579.x
• 20. Ge J, Yang C, Zheng J, Hu Y. Autogenous bone grafting for treatment of osseous defect after impacted mandibular third molar extraction: A randomized controlled trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2017;19(3):572-580. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12466
• 21. Dodson TB. Is there a role for reconstructive techniques to prevent periodontal defects after third molar surgery? J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005;63(7):891-896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2005.03.003
• 22. de Oliveira GS, Miziara MN, Silva ER, Ferreira EL, Biulchi AP, Alves JB. Enhanced bone formation during healing process of tooth sockets filled with demineralized human dentine matrix. Aust Dent J. 2013;58(3):326-332. https://doi.org/10.1111/adj.12088
• 23. Kim YK, Kim SG, Bae JH, Um IW, Oh JS, Jeong KI. Guided bone regeneration using autogenous tooth bone graft in implant therapy: case series. Implant Dent. 2014;23(2):138-143. https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0000000000000046
• 24. Minetti E, Giacometti E, Gambardella U, et al. Alveolar Socket Preservation with Different Autologous Graft Materials: Preliminary Results of a Multicenter Pilot Study in Human. Materials (Basel). 2020;13(5):1153. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13051153
• 25. Kabir MA, Murata M, Kusano K, Akazawa T, Shibata T. Autogenous demineralized dentin graft for third molar socket regeneration – A case report. Dentistry. 2015;5(11). https://doi.org/10.4172/2161-1122.1000343
• 26. Wachol K, Morawiec T, Nowak-Wachol A, et al. Comparative analysis of implant prosthesis treatment planning and execution following bone repair procedures using dynamic surgical navigation in augmented areas. Coatings. 2022;12(8):1099. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings12081099
• 27. Kubaszek B, Morawiec T, Mertas A, et al. Radiological and microbiological evaluation of the efficacy of alveolar bone repair using autogenous dentin matrix—preliminary study. Coatings. 2022;12(7):909. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings12070909
• 28. Morawiec T, Dziedzic A, Niedzielska I, et al. The biological activity of propolis-containing toothpaste on oral health environment in patients who underwent implant-supported prosthodontic rehabilitation. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2013;2013:704947. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/704947
• 29. Wiatrak K, Morawiec T, Rój R, et al. Evaluation of Effectiveness of a Toothpaste Containing Tea Tree Oil and Ethanolic Extract of Propolis on the Improvement of Oral Health in Patients Using Removable Partial Dentures. Molecules. 2021;26(13):4071. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26134071
• 30. Kim YK, Kim SG, Yun PY, et al. Autogenous teeth used for bone grafting: a comparison with traditional grafting materials. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2014;117(1):e39-e45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2012.04.018
• 31. Haugen HJ, Lyngstadaas SP, Rossi F, Perale G. Bone grafts: which is the ideal biomaterial? J Clin Periodontol. 2019;46(Suppl 21):92-102. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.13058