Evidence Hub

Primary flap closure in alveolar ridge preservation for periodontally damaged extraction socket: A randomized clinical trial

Gil-Jong Seo, H. Lim, D. Chang, Ji-Youn Hong, Seung-Il Shin, Gyutae Kim, Seung-Yun Shin

Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 2022

28 participants · 14 citations

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The effect of primary wound closure (PC) on alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) in periodontally damaged sockets has yet to be fully discovered.

METHODS

Periodontally damaged sockets were allocated to one of the following groups: (1) ARP with PC (group PC), and (2) ARP without PC (group secondary wound closure [SC]). Following tooth extraction and flap elevation, granule-type xenogeneic bone substitute material and a collagen barrier were applied. Ridge change was evaluated using cone-beam computed tomographic (CBCT) scans immediately after ARP and at 4 months. Core biopsy specimens were examined histomorphometrically.

RESULTS

A total of 28 patients were included in the analysis (13 in group PC, 15 in group SC). Histomorphometrically, the percentage of newly formed bone was 26.2 ± 17.7% and 24.6 ± 18.4% in groups PC and SC, respectively (independent t-test, degree of freedom [df] = 25, p > 0.05). Horizontal ridge changes on CBCT were -4.9 ± 3.1 mm and - 4.2 ± 2.5 mm in groups PC and SC at the 1 mm level below the ridge crest, respectively (independent t-test, df = 26, p > 0.05). Approximately half of the sites required additional bone augmentation at implant placement.

CONCLUSIONS

ARP with/without PC yielded similar new bone formation and radiographic ridge change. This clinical trial was not registered prior to participant recruitment and randomization (https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/search/detailSearch.do/19718).

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 28 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free