Evaluation of Guided Bone Regeneration Using Xenograft/APRF Mixture in Atrophic Posterior Mandible (Clinical and Radiographic study)

Introduction: The rehabilitation of posterior mandible with dental implants represents today a hard challenge for clinicians due to the lack of supporting bone. Different surgical techniques are currently being used to augment the posterior mandible where GBR is considered most commonly used. Materials and Methods: Fifteen patients were selected to treat mandibular alveolar ridge resorption with guided bone regeneration using titanium reinforced membrane and a filling mixture of xenograft bovine bone/PRF. The membrane was fixed using meisinger pin control kit and profix 3mm microscrews. A PRF membrane was used to cover the Ti d-ptfe. Results: Using the mixture of PRF/xenograft as well as PRF membranes showed promising results in term of primary wound healing, whereas a significant bone quantity with a mean bone volume of 5.78 ± 0.81 was reported. The primary implant stability recorded high values and significantly increased at a period of 6 months post insertion p=0.037 Conclusion: It could be concluded that PFR/ xenograft mixture can be promising when used with the titanium reinforced d-ptfe membrane in 3D ridge reconstruction of atrophic posterior mandible, moreover using PRF membrane to cover the TI- d-ptfe membrane could enhance soft tissue healing as well as it can prevent soft tissue dehiscence due to the concentration of the growth factors that can be released during primary wound healing.  Xenograft/PRf mixture can be consistent to be utilized for creation of new bone in severely atrophic ridges if used in GBR. The high ISQ at primary implant placement and at a period of 6 months post insertion according to Osstell can explain the successful application of this mixture in 3D bone augmentation of atrophic posterior mandible

Evaluation of Guided Bone Regeneration Using Xenograft/APRF Mixture in Atrophic Posterior Mandible (Clinical and Radiographic study)

Introduction: The rehabilitation of posterior mandible with dental implants represents today a hard challenge for clinicians due to the lack of supporting bone. Different surgical techniques are currently being used to augment the posterior mandible where GBR is considered most commonly used. Materials and Methods: Fifteen patients were selected to treat mandibular alveolar ridge resorption with guided bone regeneration using titanium reinforced membrane and a filling mixture of xenograft bovine bone/PRF. The membrane was fixed using meisinger pin control kit and profix 3mm microscrews. A PRF membrane was used to cover the Ti d-ptfe. Results: Using the mixture of PRF/xenograft as well as PRF membranes showed promising results in term of primary wound healing, whereas a significant bone quantity with a mean bone volume of 5.78 ± 0.81 was reported. The primary implant stability recorded high values and significantly increased at a period of 6 months post insertion p=0.037 Conclusion: It could be concluded that PFR/ xenograft mixture can be promising when used with the titanium reinforced d-ptfe membrane in 3D ridge reconstruction of atrophic posterior mandible, moreover using PRF membrane to cover the TI- d-ptfe membrane could enhance soft tissue healing as well as it can prevent soft tissue dehiscence due to the concentration of the growth factors that can be released during primary wound healing.  Xenograft/PRf mixture can be consistent to be utilized for creation of new bone in severely atrophic ridges if used in GBR. The high ISQ at primary implant placement and at a period of 6 months post insertion according to Osstell can explain the successful application of this mixture in 3D bone augmentation of atrophic posterior mandible

Evaluation of Guided Bone Regeneration Using Xenograft/APRF Mixture in Atrophic Posterior Mandible (Clinical and Radiographic Study)

Introduction: The rehabilitation of the posterior mandible with dental implants represents a hard challenge for clinicians today due to the lack of supporting bone. Different surgical techniques are currently being used to augment the posterior mandible, where GBR is considered the most commonly used. Materials and Methods: Fifteen patients were selected to treat mandibular alveolar ridge resorption with guided bone regeneration using a titanium-reinforced membrane and a filling mixture of xenograft bovine bone and PRF. The membrane was fixed using a Meisinger pin control kit and Profix 3mm microscrews. A PRF membrane was used to cover the Ti-d-ptfe. Results: Swelling, pain, and numbness were evaluated using the mixture of PRF/xenograft as well as PRF membranes. The results showed promising results in terms of primary wound healing, whereas a significant bone quantity with a mean bone volume of 5.78 ± 0.81 was reported after 6 months. The primary implant stability recorded high values and significantly increased at a period of 6 months post-insertion (p = 0.037). Conclusion: It could be concluded that the PFR/xenograft mixture can be promising when used with the titanium-reinforced d-ptfe membrane in 3D ridge reconstruction of the atrophic posterior mandible; moreover, using the PRF membrane to cover the TI-d-ptfe membrane could enhance soft tissue healing as well as prevent soft tissue dehiscence due to the concentration of growth factors that can be released during primary wound healing. The xenograft/PRf mixture can be consistently utilized for the creation of new bone in severely atrophic ridges if used in GBR. The high ISQ at primary implant placement and at a period of 6 months post-insertion, according to Osstell, can explain the successful application of this mixture in 3D bone augmentation of the atrophic posterior mandible

Comparison of Piezosurgery and Conventional Rotary Instruments for Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars: A Randomized Controlled Clinical and Radiographic Trial

The purpose of this study was to test the effect of the surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars using piezosurgery versus the conventional surgical technique on postoperative sequelae and bone healing. Material and Methods. This study was carried out as a randomized controlled clinical trial: split mouth design. Twenty patients with bilateral mandibular third molar mesioangular impaction class II position B indicated for surgical extraction were treated randomly using either the piezosurgery or the conventional bur technique on each site. Duration of the procedure, postoperative edema, trismus, pain, healing, and bone density and quantity were evaluated up to 6 months postoperatively. Results. Test and control sites were compared using paired t-test. There was statistical significance in reduction of pain and swelling in test sites, where the time of the procedure was statistically increased in test site. For bone quantity and quality, statistical difference was found where test site showed better results. Conclusion. Piezosurgery technique improves quality of patient’s life in form of decrease of postoperative pain, trismus, and swelling. Furthermore, it enhances bone quality within the extraction socket and bone quantity along the distal aspect of the mandibular second molar

Clinical Study Comparison of Piezosurgery and Conventional Rotary Instruments for Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars: A Randomized Controlled Clinical and Radiographic Trial

The purpose of this study was to test the effect of the surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars using piezosurgery versus the conventional surgical technique on postoperative sequelae and bone healing. Material and Methods. This study was carried out as a randomized controlled clinical trial: split mouth design. Twenty patients with bilateral mandibular third molar mesioangular impaction class II position B indicated for surgical extraction were treated randomly using either the piezosurgery or the conventional bur technique on each site. Duration of the procedure, postoperative edema, trismus, pain, healing, and bone density and quantity were evaluated up to 6 months postoperatively. Results. Test and control sites were compared using paired t-test. There was statistical significance in reduction of pain and swelling in test sites, where the time of the procedure was statistically increased in test site. For bone quantity and quality, statistical difference was found where test site showed better results. Conclusion. Piezosurgery technique improves quality of patient's life in form of decrease of postoperative pain, trismus, and swelling. Furthermore, it enhances bone quality within the extraction socket and bone quantity along the distal aspect of the mandibular second molar