Posterior mandibular tooth socket preservation with amniotic membrane and allograft bone versus conventional methods

Tooth socket preservation has become a key component of contemporary clinical dentistry. This term designates alveolar preservation that achieved by immediate filling of the undamaged tooth socket with biomaterials. Different types of bone substitutions and membranes have been utilized for socket augmentation. Our goal was to evaluate the efficacy of the amniotic membrane, as a new material, on bone density in comparison with conventional methods in this study. In this randomized clinical trial 75 patients (48 females and 27 males) underwent mandibular molar extraction and socket preservation by using allograft bone in control group: allograft bone with collagen membrane in group 1 and allograft bone with amniotic membrane in group 2. All 25 stages of socket preservation procedures in each group were done by the same surgeon and evaluated by the same radiographic machine. The data were statistically analyzed by SPSS software, one-way ANOVA and Tukey post-hoc tests. P value <0.05 was considered as significant. The results of this study showed that after 4 months the mean density difference in extracted site was 1736.88 in control group; for patients who underwent socket preservation with allograft and collagen membrane it was 1746.20 and in cases with allograft in addition amniotic membrane it was 1762.48. The results demonstrated that, compared with control group, both collagen membrane and amniotic membrane showed a higher bone density mean (P Value =/998 and P Value = /918), but this difference was not statistically significant. Whereas amniotic membrane showed a higher bone density than the collagen membrane, there are no significant differences between these two groups (P Value =/994). Although socket preservation methods may be effective on alveolar bone contour stability, we cannot significantly confirm the efficacy of these methods on bone quality and density.

[1]  S. Elangovan,et al.  Effect of Alveolar Ridge Preservation after Tooth Extraction , 2014, Journal of dental research.

[2]  M. Alarcón,et al.  Bone density of defects treated with lyophilized amniotic membrane versus collagen membrane: a tomographic and histomorfogenic study in rabbit´s femur , 2014 .

[3]  J. Rossmann,et al.  Ridge Preservation for Implant Therapy: a Review of the Literature , 2014, The open dentistry journal.

[4]  M. Kesting,et al.  Amniotic membrane in oral and maxillofacial surgery , 2014, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery.

[5]  P. Giannoudis,et al.  The role of barrier membranes for guided bone regeneration and restoration of large bone defects: current experimental and clinical evidence , 2012, BMC Medicine.

[6]  B. Mealey,et al.  Histologic comparison of healing after tooth extraction with ridge preservation using mineralized versus demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft. , 2012, Journal of periodontology.

[7]  T. Young,et al.  The effects of acellular amniotic membrane matrix on osteogenic differentiation and ERK1/2 signaling in human dental apical papilla cells. , 2012, Biomaterials.

[8]  A. Khoshzaban,et al.  Human amniotic membrane, best healing accelerator, and the choice of bone induction for vestibuloplasty technique (an animal study) , 2010 .

[9]  Helene Polin,et al.  Osteogenic differentiation of intact human amniotic membrane. , 2010, Biomaterials.

[10]  Socket and ridge preservation from the three-dimensional perspective , 2010 .

[11]  J. Mehta,et al.  Effect of dispase denudation on amniotic membrane , 2009, Molecular vision.

[12]  Hom-lay Wang,et al.  Comparison of dermal matrix and polytetrafluoroethylene membrane for socket bone augmentation: a clinical and histologic study. , 2009, Journal of periodontology.

[13]  G. Raghoebar,et al.  Clinical and radiographic characteristics of single-tooth replacements preceded by local ridge augmentation: a prospective randomized clinical trial. , 2008, Clinical oral implants research.

[14]  M. G. Vilela-Goulart,et al.  Homogenous amniotic membrane as a biological dressing for oral mucositis in rats: histomorphometric analysis. , 2008, Archives of oral biology.

[15]  Hom-lay Wang,et al.  Histologic evaluation of socket augmentation with mineralized human allograft. , 2008, The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry.

[16]  A. Seifalian,et al.  Properties of the amniotic membrane for potential use in tissue engineering. , 2008, European cells & materials.

[17]  K. Sekiguchi,et al.  Characterization of laminin isoforms in human amnion. , 2008, Tissue & cell.

[18]  R. Chuck,et al.  Immunosuppressive Property of Dried Human Amniotic Membrane , 2007, Ophthalmic Research.

[19]  B. Stegenga,et al.  Is there evidence that barrier membranes prevent bone resorption in autologous bone grafts during the healing period? A systematic review. , 2007, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[20]  A. Sculean,et al.  Effect of platelet-rich plasma on the healing of intra-bony defects treated with a natural bone mineral and a collagen membrane. , 2007, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[21]  W. Wee,et al.  The Expression of TIMPs in Cryo-Preserved and Freeze-Dried Amniotic Membrane , 2007, Current eye research.

[22]  T. Nikaido,et al.  The potential of amniotic membrane/amnion-derived cells for regeneration of various tissues. , 2007, Journal of pharmacological sciences.

[23]  David P Sarment,et al.  Accuracy of cone beam computed tomography for periodontal defect measurements. , 2006, Journal of periodontology.

[24]  H. Amthauer,et al.  Validation of Bone Conversion in Osteoconductive and Osteoinductive Bone Substitutes , 2004, Cell and Tissue Banking.

[25]  Mauro Alini,et al.  Chondrocytes seeded onto poly (L/DL-lactide) 80%/20% porous scaffolds: a biochemical evaluation. , 2003, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A.

[26]  S. Hung,et al.  The influence of membrane exposure on the outcomes of guided tissue regeneration: clinical and microbiological aspects. , 2003, Journal of periodontal research.

[27]  J. Bernimoulin,et al.  Histological assessment of augmented jaw bone utilizing a new collagen barrier membrane compared to a standard barrier membrane to protect a granular bone substitute material. , 2002, Clinical oral implants research.

[28]  Jason Hodde,et al.  Naturally occurring scaffolds for soft tissue repair and regeneration. , 2002, Tissue engineering.

[29]  L. Marinucci,et al.  In vitro comparison of bioabsorbable and non-resorbable membranes in bone regeneration. , 2001, Journal of periodontology.

[30]  N. Zitzmann,et al.  Long-term results of implants treated with guided bone regeneration: a 5-year prospective study. , 2001, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[31]  M. Paulsson,et al.  Laminins: Structure and genetic regulation , 2000, Microscopy research and technique.

[32]  D. H. Ma,et al.  Identification of Antiangiogenic and Antiinflammatory Proteins in Human Amniotic Membrane , 2000, Cornea.

[33]  N. Koizumi,et al.  Growth factor mRNA and protein in preserved human amniotic membrane. , 2000, Current eye research.

[34]  L. Landi,et al.  Histomorphometric evaluation of extraction sockets and deficient alveolar ridges treated with allograft and barrier membrane: a pilot study. , 1999, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[35]  P. Sandstedt,et al.  A comparative study of anorganic xenogenic bone and autogenous bone implants for bone regeneration in rabbits. , 1999, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[36]  O. Johnell,et al.  Osteopromotive membranes enhance onlay integration and maintenance in the adult rat skull. , 1998, International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery.

[37]  H. Salama,et al.  Alveolar ridge preservation and reconstruction. , 1996, Periodontology 2000.

[38]  S. Marcus,et al.  Tooth Retention and Tooth Loss in the Permanent Dentition of Adults: United States, 1988–1991 , 1996, Journal of dental research.

[39]  A L Rosenfeld,et al.  Influence of residual ridge resorption patterns on implant fixture placement and tooth position. 1. , 1991, The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry.