Email this article Clinical, Radiographic, and Histologic Comparison of Ridge Augmentation with Bioactive Glass Alone and in Combination with Autogenous Bone Graft.
Abstract
Introduction
In spite of multiple applications of bioactive glasses, these materials have not been evaluated yet for ridge augmentation. Due to the large number of patients who need ridge augmentation and the benefits of Nova Bone, in comparison with other alloplasts, this study was fulfilled for evaluation of Nova Bone ability in ridge augmentation.
Methods
The samples of this experimental study are four dogs. In each one, two months after extraction of lower premolors and alveolectomy of that area, one side was augmented with NovaBone alone and the other side was augmented with the combination of Nova Bone and autogenous bone. After 2,4, and 6months, changes in ridge height were evaluated with clinical and radiologic methods. In the end of study, the dogs were sacrificed for obtaining histologic samples.
Results
In the alone NovaBone group, grafts of two ridges were exposed, but in the other two ridges, in spite of insignificance of statistic test, the amounts of ridges augmentation were clinically significant (mean: 6.5 mm) and new tissue, containing bony texture, was formed. In the other three ridges, in addition to significance of statistic test and formation of new tissue containing bony texture, the amount of ridge augmentation was considerable(mean: 5.5 mm). There wasn't significant difference between two forms of Nova Bone usage.
Discussion
Without considering of the results of statistic tests, the amounts of ridge augmentations were clinically significant in both groups. Therefore, considering the radiologic and histologic findings, and the biocompatibility of NovaBone, both forms of this material can be successful in ridge augmentation.
Key Words
Ridge augmentation, Bioactive glass
In spite of multiple applications of bioactive glasses, these materials have not been evaluated yet for ridge augmentation. Due to the large number of patients who need ridge augmentation and the benefits of Nova Bone, in comparison with other alloplasts, this study was fulfilled for evaluation of Nova Bone ability in ridge augmentation.
Methods
The samples of this experimental study are four dogs. In each one, two months after extraction of lower premolors and alveolectomy of that area, one side was augmented with NovaBone alone and the other side was augmented with the combination of Nova Bone and autogenous bone. After 2,4, and 6months, changes in ridge height were evaluated with clinical and radiologic methods. In the end of study, the dogs were sacrificed for obtaining histologic samples.
Results
In the alone NovaBone group, grafts of two ridges were exposed, but in the other two ridges, in spite of insignificance of statistic test, the amounts of ridges augmentation were clinically significant (mean: 6.5 mm) and new tissue, containing bony texture, was formed. In the other three ridges, in addition to significance of statistic test and formation of new tissue containing bony texture, the amount of ridge augmentation was considerable(mean: 5.5 mm). There wasn't significant difference between two forms of Nova Bone usage.
Discussion
Without considering of the results of statistic tests, the amounts of ridge augmentations were clinically significant in both groups. Therefore, considering the radiologic and histologic findings, and the biocompatibility of NovaBone, both forms of this material can be successful in ridge augmentation.
Key Words
Ridge augmentation, Bioactive glass
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.