Alveolar Ridge Preservation Using Autogenous Tooth Graft Versus Autogenous Demineralized Dentin Graft. A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.
Alveolar Ridge Preservation Using Autogenous Tooth Graft Versus Autogenous Demineralized Dentin Graft. A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.
Alveolar bone resorption following tooth extraction is unavoidable. Graft placement following extraction is recommended when considering restorative procedures afterwards. The extracted tooth was considered a clinical waste. However, it is now seen as a convenient and available source for graft material. Different protocols are applied to process the extracted tooth for obtaining the graft material and investigations are needed to assess the protocol with the best outcome.
Autogenous graft is widely accepted as the gold standard for grafting procedures(Sakkas et al. 2017). And since the introduction of autogenous dentin graft for alveolar ridge preservation by Kim et al. clinically (Y.-K. Kim et al. 2010), it has increasingly attracted attention and teeth are no longer seen only as a waste. Tooth dentin has a chemical composition similar to that of alveolar bone; the inorganic content is 70%-75%, organic content 20%, and water content 10%, whereas alveolar bone has proportions of 65%, 25%, and 10% respectively(Y.-K. Kim et al. 2013). The similarity in chemical composition between dentin and alveolar bone, as well as its content of growth factors such as bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs), made the dentin a successful graft for filing alveolar bone defects of same patient(Y.-K. Kim et al. 2010, Nampo et al. 2010, Y.-K. Kim et al. 2013) .
The technique proposed by Kim et al includes demineralization of the dentin as it reduces minerals content, exposes collagen fibrils and increases BMPs released thus promoting the process of osteogenesis(Y.-K. Kim et al. 2010). However, demineralisation step is time-consuming, taking several days, which challenges same visit application. As a result, two main approaches have been developed to overcome this obstacle. One approach is to maintain the demineralization step but with improving the technique to shorten the processing time(MURATA et al. 2010, E.-S. Kim 2015, Kabir et al. 2015). On the other hand, many investigators have used the whole tooth without demineralization and reported satisfactory clinical outcome(Gideon Hallel et al. 2014, Valdec et al. 2017). Hence, more investigations are needed to evaluate the technique with the best outcome.
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria: