Filling of extraction sockets of feline maxillary canine teeth with autogenous bone or bioactive glass.

PURPOSE To evaluate bone healing in the extraction socket of the feline maxillary canine tooth after grafting. METHODS Eighteen adult cats were submitted to unilateral extraction of maxillary canine tooth and divided into three groups. In group 1 (n=6), control, the extraction socket was left empty. In group 2 (n=6), the extraction socket was filled with autogenous cancellous bone from the iliac crest and in group 3 (n=6), with bioactive glass particulate material. Cats were euthanized at four weeks postoperative. RESULTS The radiographic examinations performed four weeks after surgery showed that in all groups the healing process converged to a radiopacity similar to that observed in the surrounding bones. Histological examination showed formation of woven bone within the extraction socket. The percentage of newly formed bone within the extraction socket, measured by the histometry, showed no statistically significant difference among the values of the three groups (Kruskal-Wallis'test p>0.05) (group 1: 63.96 ± 5.85, group 2: 66.84 ± 11.67, group 3: 59.28 ± 15.50). CONCLUSION The bone regeneration observed in the extraction sockets filled with autogenous cancellous bone or bioactive glass was similar to that observed in the control sites, given an observation period of four weeks after extraction of the maxillary canine tooth.

[1]  E. Everett,et al.  In Vivo Assessment of Osseous Wound Healing Using a Novel Bone Putty Containing Lidocaine in the Surgical Management of Tooth Extractions , 2012, International journal of dentistry.

[2]  Adelina Maria da Silva,et al.  Filling of extraction sockets with autogenous bone in cats. , 2012, Acta cirurgica brasileira.

[3]  J. Lindhe,et al.  Socket grafting with the use of autologous bone: an experimental study in the dog. , 2011, Clinical oral implants research.

[4]  B. Niemiec.  Extraction techniques. , 2008, Topics in companion animal medicine.

[5]  B. Niemiec.  Fundamentals of endodontics. , 2005, The Veterinary clinics of North America. Small animal practice.

[6]  C. Harvey.  Management of periodontal disease: understanding the options. , 2005, The Veterinary clinics of North America. Small animal practice.

[7]  L. Cooper,et al.  Evaluation of mesenchymal stem cells following implantation in alveolar sockets: a canine safety study. , 2005, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[8]  Z. Suba,et al.  Facilitation of beta-tricalcium phosphate-induced alveolar bone regeneration by platelet-rich plasma in beagle dogs: a histologic and histomorphometric study. , 2004, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[9]  M. Laursen,et al.  Optimal handling of fresh cancellous bone graftDifferent peroperative storing techniques evaluated by in vitro osteoblast-like cell metabolism , 2003, Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica.

[10]  A. Reiter,et al.  Feline odontoclastic resorptive lesions an unsolved enigma in veterinary dentistry. , 2002, The Veterinary clinics of North America. Small animal practice.

[11]  F. Melsen,et al.  Influence of particle size of autogenous bone grafts on the early stages of bone regeneration: a histologic and stereologic study in rabbit calvarium. , 2002, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[12]  R. Betz,et al.  Limitations of autograft and allograft: new synthetic solutions. , 2002, Orthopedics.

[13]  A. Vaccaro.  The role of the osteoconductive scaffold in synthetic bone graft. , 2002, Orthopedics.

[14]  M. Block,et al.  Comparison of 3 bone substitutes in canine extraction sites. , 2002, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[15]  G. Daculsi,et al.  A new injectable calcium phosphate biomaterial for immediate bone filling of extraction sockets: a preliminary study in dogs. , 1999, Journal of periodontology.

[16]  DeForge Dh.  Evaluation of Bioglass/PerioGlas (Consil) synthetic bone graft particulate in the dog and cat. , 1997 .

[17]  P. Ducheyne,et al.  Bioactive glass particles of narrow size range for the treatment of oral bone defects: a 1-24 month experiment with several materials and particle sizes and size ranges. , 1997, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[18]  D. H. DeForge.  Evaluation of Bioglass/PerioGlas (Consil) synthetic bone graft particulate in the dog and cat. , 1997, Journal of veterinary dentistry.