Collagen membrane and L-PRF with Xenogeneic bone block for vertical ridge augmentation: An Experimental study in a canine model

Eldabe, Abdelrahman Khalaf; Gamal, Ahmad; Amr, Ahmed Elsayed; Abdel Hamid, Ehab Saeed; Abu-Seida, Ashraf

doi:10.21608/asdj.2021.82124.1057

Collagen membrane and L-PRF with Xenogeneic bone block for vertical ridge augmentation: An Experimental study in a canine model

Document Type : Original articles

Authors

¹ Department of Oral Medicine , Periodontology and Diagnosis , faculty of dentistry Assiut University, Assiut, Egypt

² Department of Oral Medicine, Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, 6 October University, Giza, Egypt

³ Department of oral medicine and Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain shams university, Cairo, Egypt

⁴ Department of oral pathology, Faculty of Dentistry , Badr University, Egypt

⁵ Dept. of Surgery, Anesthesiology and Radiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt

10.21608/asdj.2021.82124.1057

Abstract

Background: Guided bone regeneration has been tried using a variety of barrier membranes, and it is thought to be achieved when osteoprogenitor cells are allowed to repopulate the area of the bone defect . PRF, have the advantage that without anticoagulants, a fibrin matrix that incorporates the full set of growth factors trapped within its matrix can slowly release these growth factors over time. The aim of this study was to evaluate the benefits of using L-PRF in bone regeneration when utilizing GBR technique.
Methods: The study involved six mature mongrel dogs, each weighing at least 18 kg. In the first phase, four standardized saddle-type defects were prepared. After a two-month recuperation period, a xenogeneic block graft was utilized in the two groups. In group (1), block graft was covered by a collagen membrane (Block + C M), while in group (2), two L-PRF membranes were added first before top coverage by collagen membrane( Block + L PRF + C M ). Animals were subjected to surgical reentry after a three-month healing period following grafting for clinical observation and then euthanized for histological processing.
Results: In group 1, there was a statistically significant difference between (New bone apical side) and each of (New bone periosteum side) and (New bone intermediate) (p0.001).In group 2 no statistically significant difference between (New bone periosteum side), (New Bone intermediate) and (New Bone apical side) (p=0.225).
Conclusion:Tthe usage of the (L PRF ) in ridge augmentation appears to enhance the quality of regenerated bone.

Keywords