RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To compare radiographic bone changes, following alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) using Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR), a Socket Seal (SS) technique or unassisted socket healing (Control). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients requiring a single rooted tooth extraction in the anterior maxilla, were randomly allocated into: GBR, SS and Control groups (n= 14/). Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) images were recorded post-extraction and at 4 months, the mid-buccal and mid-palatal alveolar ridge heights (BARH/PARH) were measured. The alveolar ridge width, cross-sectional socket and alveolar-process area changes, implant placement feasibility, requirement for bone augmentation and post-surgical complications were also recorded. RESULTS: BARH and PARH was found to increase with the SS (0.65 mm ± 1.1/0.65 mm ± 1.42) techniques, stabilise with GBR (0.07 mm ± 0.83/0.86 mm ±1.37) and decrease in the Control (-0.52 mm ± 0.8/-0.43 mm ± 0.83). Statistically significance was found when comparing the GBR and SS BARH (p = .04/.005) and GBR PARH (p = .02) against the Control. GBR recorded the smallest reduction in alveolar ridge width (-2.17 mm ± 0.84), when compared to the Control (-2.3 mm ± 1.11) (p = .89). A mid-socket cross-sectional area reduction of 4% (-2.27 mm2 ± 11.89), 1% (-0.88 mm2 ± 15.48) and 13% (-6.93 mm2 ± 8.22) was found with GBR, SS and Control groups (GBR vs. Control p = .01). The equivalent alveolar process area reduction was 8% (-7.36 mm2 ± 10.45), 6% (-7 mm2 ± 18.97) and 11% (-11.32 mm2 ± 10.92). All groups supported implant placement, with bone dehiscence noted in 57% (n = 4), 64%(n = 7) and 85%(n = 12) of GBR, SS and Control cases (GBR vs. Control p = .03). GBR had a higher risk of swelling and mucosal colour change, with SS associated with graft sequestration and matrix breakdown. CONCLUSION: GBR ARP was found to be more effective at reducing radiographic bone dimensional changes following tooth extraction.
