ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Several types of bone grafts are used in ridge preservation procedures. PURPOSE: To compare the healing of allografts and xenografts applied for alveolar ridge preservation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty volunteers in need of extraction of a single-rooted tooth prior to implant installation were randomized into two groups. One group received a deproteinized cancellous bovine bone xenograft embedded in a 10% collagen matrix and the other a demineralized freeze-dried cortical bone allograft. A collagen membrane was used to cover the grafts, flaps were sutured. At baseline and 6 months later, clinical measurements including vertical and horizontal bone dimensions were taken. Histomorphometric analysis was performed. RESULTS: Both groups showed shrinkage of bone dimensions. At mesial, center and distal sites, the vertical changes in dimension were -0.6, 0.5, and -0.1 mm for the allograft and -1.1, -0.4, and -0.9 mm for the xenograft. The horizontal changes in dimensions were -1.4 mm for the allograft and -2.6 mm for the xenograft. New bone and residual graft material were 25.5 ± 10.1% and 33.8 ± 9.4% at the allograft and 35.3 ± 16.8% and 22.2 ± 13.4% at the xenograft sites. None of the differences was statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Both grafting materials are suitable for the preservation of the alveolar ridge.
Subject(s)
Alveolar Ridge Augmentation/methods , Bone Transplantation/methods , Adult , Allografts/pathology , Alveolar Process/pathology , Alveolar Process/surgery , Animals , Cattle , Female , Heterografts/pathology , Humans , MaleABSTRACT
OBJETIVO: Medir la cobertura efectiva para once intervenciones de salud en nueve países de América Latina utilizando las encuestas de demografía y salud o registros administrativos que abarcan la salud infantil, de la mujer y el adulto. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Se seleccionaron las intervenciones y se armonizaron definiciones y métodos de cálculo de acuerdo con la información disponible para lograr la comparabilidad entre países. RESULTADOS: Chile es el país con mejores indicadores de coberturas crudas y efectivas, seguido por México y Colombia, y existen brechas importantes entre regiones, departamentos o estados. CONCLUSIONES: La métrica de cobertura efectiva es un indicador sensible que relaciona la necesidad de las intervenciones en salud, su utilización y calidad, lo que permite valorar los programas de salud al aportar datos precisos de dónde y a quién deben dirigirse los recursos y esfuerzos nacionales para que los países alcancen los propósitos y metas planteados.
OBJECTIVE: To measure effective coverage for ll health interventions in Latin America including the children's, women's and adult health, as part of program evaluation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Interventions were selected; the definitions and calculation methods were harmonized according to the information available to ensure comparability between countries. RESULTS: Chile has better indicators of crude and effective coverage followed by Mexico and Colombia.There are significant gaps between regions, counties or states. CONCLUSIONS: The health metric on effective coverage is a sensitive indicator that links three important aspects: Coverage of health interventions, use of health services, and access to such services. Effective coverage is a good tool to evaluate health programs performance, and also provides data of where and to whom the system should address national efforts and resources to achieve the purposes and goals set.
