Ridge preservation using a composite bone graft and a bioabsorbable membrane with and without primary wound closure: a comparative clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this single-masked, randomized controlled clinical trial is to compare hard and soft tissue changes after ridge preservation performed with (control, RPc) and without (test, RPe) primary soft tissue closure in a split-mouth design. METHODS: Eleven patients completed this 6-month trial. Extraction and ridge preservation were performed using a composite bone graft of inorganic bovine-derived hydroxyapatite matrix and cell binding peptide P-15 (ABM/P-15), demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft, and a copolymer bioabsorbable membrane. Primary wound closure was achieved on the control sites (RPc), whereas test sites (RPe) left the membrane exposed. Pocket probing depth on adjacent teeth, repositioning of the mucogingival junction, bone width, bone fill, and postoperative discomfort were assessed. Bone cores were obtained for histological examination. RESULTS: Intragroup analyses for both groups demonstrated statistically significant mean reductions in probing depth (RPc: 0.42 mm, P = 0.012; RPe: 0.25 mm, P = 0.012) and bone width (RPc: 3 mm, P = 0.002; RPe: 3.42 mm, P <0.001). However, intergroup analysis did not find these parameters to be statistically different at 6 months. The test group showed statistically significant mean change in bone fill (7.21 mm; P <0.001). Compared to the control group, the test group showed statistically significant lower mean postoperative discomfort (RPc 4 versus RPe 2; P = 0.002). Histomorphometric analysis showed presence of 0% to 40% of ABM/P-15 and 5% to 20% of new bone formation in both groups. Comparison of clinical variables between the two groups at 6 months revealed that the mucogingival junction was statistically significantly more coronally displaced in the control group than in the test group, with a mean of 3.83 mm versus 1.21 mm (P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Ridge preservation without flap advancement preserves more keratinized tissue and has less postoperative discomfort and swelling. Although ridge preservation is performed with either method, ≈27% to 30% of bone width is lost.

Intraosseous anchorage of dental prostheses: an early 20th century contribution.

A thorough literature review of root form implants yielded a paucity of information regarding the true pioneers of this discipline. Numerous articles have been written on the history of endosseous implants, although little information is available describing the individuals to whom we attribute the major developments in implant dentistry. This article will present information regarding significant contributors to modern-day implant dentistry. Initially, articles and textbooks printed early in the 20th century were reviewed, and the relevance of implant-related information was ranked based on current concepts. This article highlights four major contributors in implant dentistry: E.J. Greenfield (1913), who developed many of the surgical techniques and principles used today; Alvin Edward Strock (1939), who introduced the first biocompatible material; Per-Ingvar Brånemark (1969), who proved the long-term success of titanium implants; and André Schroeder (1976), who introduced the roughened implant surface.