The effect of Bioactive Hydrogel versus Advanced-PRF on bone regeneration following impacted mandibular third molar surgery. Clinical and CBCT Analysis | ||||
| Egyptian Dental Journal | ||||
| Article 11, Volume 68, Issue 2, April 2022, Page 1423-1433 PDF (1.22 MB) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/edj.2022.121264.1989 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Shereen Arafat   1; Ahmed M Hossam Eldin2; Nourhan Hussien 3; Rania Abdulmaguid 4; Mohamed ElBaz 5
| ||||
| 1Associate Professor of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, October University for Modern Sciences & Arts, Egyp | ||||
| 2Associate Professor of Oral Radiology, October University for Modern Sciences & Arts, Egypt. | ||||
| 3Teaching Assisstant of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, October University for Modern Sciences & Arts, Egypt. | ||||
| 4Associate Professor of Oral Medicine & Periodontology, October University for Modern Sciences & Arts, Egypt. | ||||
| 5Associate Professor of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, October University for Modern Sciences & Arts, Egypt. | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Objectives: The current study aim was to evaluate the effect of Bioactive Hydrogel versus Advanced-PRF on bone regeneration following impacted mandibular third molar surgery. Material & Methods: sixty patients who had been scheduled for surgical removal of mesio-angular or horizontal impacted mandibular 3rd molar teeth were randomly divided into three groups. Group A involved 20 patients received A-PRF-Xenograft at the surgical site. Group B involves 20 patients received Xenograft-Hydrogel at the surgical site. While group C involved 20 patients left to heal without graft as control. Clinical and radiographic evaluation were performed immediate and at 6 months postoperatively. Data was collected and analysed statistically. Results: At 6-month postoperative evaluation, the current study found that A-PRF-Xenograft group showed significant shorter mean pain duration (5.1±1.4 days) compared to Hydrogel-Xenograft group (5.3±1.5 days) and control group (5.8±1.4 days). A-PRF-Xenograft group showed the lowest mean values of PPD (3.7±0.6) followed by Hydrogel-Xenograft group (5±0.8) and followed by control group (6.6±0.6). A-PRF-Xenograft group showed the highest mean values of bone density (605.3±85.5) followed by Hydrogel-Xenograft group (522.4±83.5) followed by control group (286.4±44.7) Conclusion: According to the results of the present study, there was significant improvement regarding pain duration, mouth opening limitation, periodontal pocket depth and bone density at the surgical site where A-PRF-Xenograft was applied. Hydrogel-Xenograft Group was more superior to the control group regarding pain duration, PPD, and bone density. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Bioactive hydrogel; A-PRF; PPD; impacted 3rd molar | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 205 PDF Download: 219 |
||||
