A 5‐year prospective study on the clinical and aesthetic outcomes of alveolar ridge preservation and connective tissue graft at the buccal aspect of single implants

2018 ◽  
Vol 45 (12) ◽  
pp. 1475-1484 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aryan Eghbali ◽  
Lorenz Seyssens ◽  
Thomas De Bruyckere ◽  
Faris Younes ◽  
Roberto Cleymaet ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Connective Tissue ◽  
Prospective Study ◽  
Ridge Preservation ◽  
Alveolar Ridge ◽  
Connective Tissue Graft ◽  
Tissue Graft ◽  
Alveolar Ridge Preservation

scholarly journals The effect of different soft-tissue management techniques for alveolar ridge preservation: a randomized controlled clinical trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Colline Papace ◽  
Christopher Büsch ◽  
Oliver Ristow ◽  
Martin Keweloh ◽  
Jürgen Hoffmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Connective Tissue ◽  
Collagen Matrix ◽  
Ridge Preservation ◽  
Alveolar Ridge ◽  
Soft Tissue Management ◽  
Gingival Thickness ◽  
Connective Tissue Graft ◽  
Alveolar Ridge Preservation ◽  
Management Techniques

Abstract Purpose For alveolar ridge preservation, various treatment protocols have been described. While most studies focus on the effect of the bone graft material, the aim of this study was to analyze the influence of different soft-tissue management techniques on the soft and hard tissue. Methods A total of 20 maxillary extraction sockets were grafted with an anorganic xenogenic bone graft and then randomly treated with either a combined epithelialized-subepithelial connective tissue graft (CECG) or a porcine collagen matrix (CM) placed in labial and palatal tunnels. Measurements of soft-tissue thickness were performed at tooth extraction (T0), implant insertion (T1) and second stage surgery (T2). Results In the CECG group, gingival thickness was 1.18 ± 0.56 mm (T0), 1.29 ± 0.26 mm (T1) and 1.2 ± 0.32 mm (T3). In the CM group, the measurements were 1.24 ± 0.50 mm (T0), 1.6 ± 0.6 mm (T1) and 1.7 ± 1.06 mm. Thus, there was an overall increase in gingival thickness from T0 to T2 of 0.02 ± 0.66 mm (CECG) compared to 0.46 ± 0.89 mm (CM). The thickness of keratinized soft-tissue was 3.91 ± 1.11 mm (CECG) and 4.76 ± 1.48 mm (CM) before extraction and 3.93 ± 1.17 mm (CECG) and 4.22 mm ± 1.26 mm (CM) at implant follow-up. Mean peri-implant probing depths were 3.15 ± 1.39 mm (CECG) and 3.41 ± 0.99 mm (CM). Conclusions After ridge preservation, comparable soft-tissue parameters were observed in both groups, whether treated with a collagen matrix or a combined autologous connective tissue graft.

scholarly journals Ridge Preservation using Dermis Allograft Tissue Matrix Membrane vs Connective Tissue Graft

2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-16
Author(s):  
Celeste M Abraham ◽  
Jeffrey A Rossmann ◽  
Ibtisam Al-Hashimi ◽  
Eric S Solomon ◽  
David G Kerns ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Connective Tissue ◽  
Autogenous Bone ◽  
Ridge Preservation ◽  
Alveolar Ridge ◽  
Connective Tissue Graft ◽  
Tissue Graft ◽  
Allograft Tissue ◽  
Ridge Width ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Tissue Matrix

ABSTRACT Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare extraction socket healing and alveolar ridge preservation using autogenous bone covered with connective tissue graft (CT) or acellular dermal matrix (ADM). Materials and Methods Sixteen nonsmoking, healthy patients with 18 nonmolar teeth requiring extraction participated in the study. Following extraction, the sockets were debrided, measured, and grafted with autogenous bone, then covered with either CT or ADM. Measurements of alveolar ridge width and height were made at baseline and after 16 to 20 weeks post extraction. Soft and hard tissue biopsies of the extraction sites were evaluated histomorphometrically. Results The mean buccolingual ridge width loss was 0.19 mm for both CT and ADM groups. The mean vertical bone gain was 1.08 mm bone for the CT group and 0.82 mm for the ADM group. Histologic evaluation revealed a mean bone fill of 40.67 and 50.76% for CT and ADM group respectively. Student t-tests did not reveal significant difference between the two groups. Conclusion The overall results of the study suggest that the use of bone graft covered with either CT or ADM is useful for ridge preservation. How to cite this article Tomlin EM, Kerns DG, Rossmann JA, Beach MM, Al-Hashimi I, Abraham CM, Solomon ES, Kessler HP. Ridge Preservation using Dermis Allograft Tissue Matrix Membrane vs Connective Tissue Graft. J Contemp Dent 2014;4(1):10-16.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document