Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1075
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3195
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Objective: The use of extracted teeth has been introduced as an option for bone grafting. However, the current method requires special machines and solutions, posing significant time and cost. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of autogenous raw tooth particles (RTP), a grafting material made from a ground tooth using basic equipment, for alveolar ridge preservation.
Materials And Methods: Twenty-three patients (12 study/11 control), having 14 and 13 sites were included for the study and control groups (commercially available xenograft), respectively. Radiographic measurements were taken at the baseline and the 4-month follow-up appointment. Furthermore, a questionnaire survey concerning the general preference of the type of graft to receive (if needed), before and after knowing the price, was distributed at the completion of the procedure for patients to answer.
Results: Alveolar ridge width change was -1.03 ± 0.64 and -0.84 ± 0.35 for the study and the control groups, respectively. Regarding the height, the study group showed a buccal and lingual change of -0.66 ± 0.48 and -0.78 ± 0.81, respectively, while this was -0.78 ± 0.56 and -0.9 ± 0.41 for the xenograft group. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups. Patients preferred the raw tooth particles over other grafting materials (p = .01).
Conclusion: No core biopsies were taken to evaluate bone formation, which should be done in future studies. Within its limitations, the current study demonstrated that RTP graft could be an alternative graft for bone augmentation, offering a new cost-effective option for clinicians when available.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.14348 | DOI Listing |