242 resultados para Blue Dog Coalition
Resumo:
Aim: To evaluate the influence of the presence or absence of adjacent teeth on the level of the mesial and distal alveolar bony crest following healing at sites where implants were installed immediately into extraction sockets. Material and methods: Six Labrador dogs were used. In the right side of the mandible, full-thickness flaps were elevated, and the second, third, and fourth premolars and first molars were extracted. In the left side of the mandible, endodontic treatments of the mesial roots of the third and fourth premolars as well as of the first molars were performed. Full-thickness flaps were elevated, the teeth were hemi-sected, and the distal roots were removed. The second premolars were extracted as well. Subsequently, implants were bilaterally installed with the implant shoulder flush with the buccal bony crest. Implants were placed in the center of the alveoli, but at the fourth premolars, they were placed toward the lingual bony plate of the alveoli. After 3 months of healing, the animals were euthanized and histological sections of the sites prepared. Results: Larger bony crest resorption was observed at the test compared with the control sites, both at the bucco-lingual and mesio-distal aspects. The differences between test and controls for the coronal level of osseointegration were smaller than those for resorption. When data from all mesial and distal sites facing an adjacent tooth were collapsed and compared with those opposing an edentulous zone, lower bony crest resorption and deeper residual marginal defects were found at the sites with neighboring teeth. Conclusion: The extraction of teeth adjacent to a socket into which implants were installed immediately after tooth extraction caused more alveolar bone resorption both for the bucco-lingual and at the mesio-distal aspects compared with sites adjacent to a maintained tooth. © 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S.
Resumo:
Aim: To evaluate the influence of deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM), in conjunction with a collagen membrane, on bone resorption at implants installed in a lingual position immediately into extraction sockets with horizontal residual buccal defects >2.0 mm. Material & methods: The pulp tissue of the mesial roots of 1M1 was removed in six Labrador dogs, and the root canals were filled with gutta-percha and cement. Flaps were elevated. The molars were hemi-sectioned and the distal roots removed. Implants were installed in a lingual position and with the shoulder flush with the buccal bony crest. After installation, defects of about 2.5 and 2.7 mm in width resulted at the buccal aspects of the test and control sites, respectively. Only in the left site (test), deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) particles were placed into the defect concomitantly with the placement of a collagen membrane. On the control sites, no biomaterials were applied. A non-submerged healing was allowed. Results: After 3 months of healing, one control implant was not integrated and was excluded from the analysis, together with the contralateral test implant. All remaining implants were integrated into mature bone. The buccal alveolar bony crest was resorbed more at the test compared with the control sites, 2.2 ± 0.9 mm and 1.5 ± 1.3 mm, respectively. The vertical resorption of the lingual plate was 1.6 ± 1.5 mm and 1.5 ± 1.1 mm at the test and control sites, respectively. Only small residual DBBM particles were found at the test sites (1.4%). Conclusion: The use of DBBM particles to fill buccal defects of ≥2.5 mm at implants installed immediately into alveolar extraction sockets did not preserve the buccal bony wall. © 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S.