We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry



Forgotten password?


Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 34 (2014), No. 4     3. July 2014
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 34 (2014), No. 4  (03.07.2014)

Page 508-521, doi:10.11607/prd.1838, PubMed:25006768

Effectiveness of Three Different Alveolar Ridge Preservation Techniques: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial
Avila-Ortiz, Gustavo / Rodriguez, Juan Carlos / Rudek, Ivan / Benavides, Erika / Rios, Hector / Wang, Hom-Lay
The aim of this pilot study was to obtain preliminary data regarding the effectiveness of three different alveolar ridge preservation modalities as compared with a control. Subjects in need of single-rooted tooth extraction were recruited and randomly allocated to one of four treatment groups: group 1 (control)-collagen plug; group 2-socket grafting and polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) barrier; group 3-socket grafting, buccal overbuilding, and PTFE barrier; group 4-socket grafting, collagen barrier, and PTFE barrier. The grafting material used in all groups was an allograft. At 16 weeks, surgical reentry was performed, and a bone core biopsy was harvested for histomorphometric analysis. A cone beam computed tomography scan was obtained at baseline and before surgical reentry. Clinical (keratinized mucosa [KM] and buccolingual ridge width [RW] changes) and volumetric outcomes were statistically analyzed. A total of 20 patients were recruited (5 patients per group). KM and buccolingual RW changes were minimal during the 16-week healing period for all groups, with no statistically significant differences. Volumetric analyses revealed comparable alveolar ridge resorption values for groups 1, 2, and 4 (3%, 7%, and 5%, respectively), while group 3 exhibited more reduction (16%). Histomorphometric analysis revealed the presence of adequate average values of mineralized tissue (group 1, 46.4%; group 2, 28.88%; group 3, 48.81%; group 4, 41.13%). Based on the clinical and volumetric outcomes, none of the ridge preservation modalities was superior to the control. The combination allograft (freeze-dried bone allograft and demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft) employed in this study appears to be a safe and adequate biomaterial for intraoral grafting.