COMPARE OF VARIOUS MATERIAL INDIVIDUAL SCAFFOLDS FOR ALVEOLAR BONE AUGMENTATION
Authors:
Dr. Anastaciia Reutova1, Dr. Ekaterina Zernitckaia2, Dr. Alexander Zernitskiy3
Affiliation:
1 Oral Surgeon, Assistant of Maxillofacial Surgery in Pavlov First Saint Petersburg State Medical University, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
2 Oral & Maxillofacial Surgeon, PhD, Pavlov First Saint Petersburg State Medical University, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
3 Oral & Maxillofacial Surgeon, PhD, Associated Professor in Pavlov First Saint Petersburg State Medical University, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
Doi: 10.54936/haoms242p51
ABSTRACT:
Objectives: In order to achieve adequate functional and esthetic outcomes, an optimal 3D implant position has to be assured. In some cases, the residual bone width, height and ridge contour are not sufficient for optimal implant placement. The use of scaffolds in terms of guided bone regeneration is a widespread procedur. The main disadvantage of prefabricated titanium scaffolds is the intraoperative manual trimming according to the individual defect size of the patient. CAD/CAM technology can be used to create individual product for each patient and take into account all the anatomical features of the defect area, using various materials such as titanium and biodegradable ones.
Materals and Methods: There were 60 patients in the study. All patients had vertical or/ and horizontal defects in the upper or lower jaw and were candidates for bone grafting procedure. Using DICOM files and open-sourse programs (3D slicer, autodesk maya etc), the individual scaffols were designed and printed before the surgery. Using itterbium laser processing, a special antibacterial coating can be obtained on the membranes. Results Of the 60 defect regions to be augmented, 22 were located in the maxilla and 38 in the mandible. In 10 cases out of 60, the membrane exposure were indicated. Thanks to the homogeneous (without perforations) structure of the membrane, in 8 cases out of 10 there was no need to remove the product and bone regeneration was successful.
Conclusion: This method provides improved management to facilitate successful surgical augmentation of the jaw bones and provides sufficient quality to improve regeneration of bone defects. Titanium scaffolds offer a simplified handling, a removal option to keep the augmented bone in place together with reduced handling time, while biodegradable ones eliminate additional surgery. Further studies are needed to evaluate the effects and benefits of individual scaffolds of various materials.
KEY WORDS:
Authors:
Dr. Anastaciia Reutova1, Dr. Ekaterina Zernitckaia2, Dr. Alexander Zernitskiy3
Affiliation:
1 Oral Surgeon, Assistant of Maxillofacial Surgery in Pavlov First Saint Petersburg State Medical University, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
2 Oral & Maxillofacial Surgeon, PhD, Pavlov First Saint Petersburg State Medical University, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
3 Oral & Maxillofacial Surgeon, PhD, Associated Professor in Pavlov First Saint Petersburg State Medical University, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation
Doi: 10.54936/haoms242p51
ABSTRACT:
Objectives: In order to achieve adequate functional and esthetic outcomes, an optimal 3D implant position has to be assured. In some cases, the residual bone width, height and ridge contour are not sufficient for optimal implant placement. The use of scaffolds in terms of guided bone regeneration is a widespread procedur. The main disadvantage of prefabricated titanium scaffolds is the intraoperative manual trimming according to the individual defect size of the patient. CAD/CAM technology can be used to create individual product for each patient and take into account all the anatomical features of the defect area, using various materials such as titanium and biodegradable ones.
Materals and Methods: There were 60 patients in the study. All patients had vertical or/ and horizontal defects in the upper or lower jaw and were candidates for bone grafting procedure. Using DICOM files and open-sourse programs (3D slicer, autodesk maya etc), the individual scaffols were designed and printed before the surgery. Using itterbium laser processing, a special antibacterial coating can be obtained on the membranes. Results Of the 60 defect regions to be augmented, 22 were located in the maxilla and 38 in the mandible. In 10 cases out of 60, the membrane exposure were indicated. Thanks to the homogeneous (without perforations) structure of the membrane, in 8 cases out of 10 there was no need to remove the product and bone regeneration was successful.
Conclusion: This method provides improved management to facilitate successful surgical augmentation of the jaw bones and provides sufficient quality to improve regeneration of bone defects. Titanium scaffolds offer a simplified handling, a removal option to keep the augmented bone in place together with reduced handling time, while biodegradable ones eliminate additional surgery. Further studies are needed to evaluate the effects and benefits of individual scaffolds of various materials.
KEY WORDS: