Title Improvement Seen in Socket Preservation And Bone Resorption In Post Extraction Patients Treated With Bovine Bone Mineral And Porcine Collagen
Clinical Question Is bone resorption and socket preservation improved in post-extraction patients treated with bovine bone mineral and porcine collagen compared to extraction alone in patients wanting implants?
Clinical Bottom Line The use of bovine bone mineral and porcine collagen membrane decreases bone resorption compared to extraction alone.
Best Evidence  
PubMed ID Author / Year Patient Group Study type
(level of evidence)
22577648Cardaropoli/201241 Post Extraction Patients Randomized Controlled Trial
Key resultsThere was less reduction in ridge width in the SP group (1.04 ± 1.08 mm vs 4.48 ± 0.65 mm, P < .001) and height (0.46 ± 0.46 mm vs 1.54 ± 0.33 mm, P < .001). Histologically, there was bone formation and maturation without inflammation. No significant difference in the mineralized and non-mineralized fractions was noted between the SP and control group.
Evidence Search "Bone matrix" [mesh] AND "Tooth Extraction"[mesh] AND "Regeneration" [mesh]
Comments on
The Evidence
This was a randomized controlled trial that included 41 patients who had one or more mandibular or maxillary molar or premolar extracted. The edentulous sites were randomly assigned to the experimental group (SP) or control group (EXT). The sockets were filled with bovine bone material and porcine collagen while the control group underwent extraction alone. The pocket probing depth, clinical attachment level, changes in residual ridge and histology were compared at baseline and after 4 months. All of patients completed the study and an adequate follow up was provided in order to compare residual ridge height, histology, PPD, and CAL.
Applicability Patients wanting successful implants post extraction
Specialty (General Dentistry) (Oral Surgery) (Prosthodontics)
Keywords Socket preservation, Bone transplantation, Collagen, Regeneration
ID# 2386
Date of submission 03/08/2013
E-mail Maredia@livemail.uthscsa.edu
Author Irena Maredia
Co-author(s) e-mail
Faculty mentor Gregory K. Spackman, DDS, MBA
Faculty mentor e-mail spackman@uthscsa.edu
Basic Science Rationale
(Mechanisms that may account for and/or explain the clinical question, i.e. is the answer to the clinical question consistent with basic biological, physical and/or behavioral science principles, laws and research?)
None available
Comments and Evidence-Based Updates on the CAT
None available