Open hour: senin - sabtu 09:00:00 - 20:00:00; minggu & tanggal merah tutup
Results : Evaluation of effectiveness of concentrated growth factor on osseointegration

Results : Evaluation of effectiveness of concentrated growth factor on osseointegration

author: Cagasan Pirpir, Onur Yilmaz, Celal Candirli, Emre Balaban | publisher: drg. Andreas Tjandra, Sp. Perio, FISID

The study includes 12 patients (5 males, 7 females). Patients participating in the study are between 20–68 years of age and the mean age is 44 years. A total of 40 implants were placed, 20 of these were included in the study group (50%), and the other 20 were included in the control group (50%). Twenty-one implants were placed in type 2 bone, 19 implants in type 3 bone (Table 1). The distribution of gender, installed implant diameter, and bone quality between the control group and the experimental group did not show any statistically significant difference. No complications occurred during the postoperative period.

At the implant placement, the average torque for study group was 31,700 ± 2,696 Ncm and for control group was 30,55 ± 2,163 Ncm; there was no significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.098).

The mean ISQ values measured after the placement of the implants were 75.75 ± 5.552 for the control group and 78.00 ± 2.828 for the study group. There was no statistically significant difference between control and study groups in terms of initial ISQ values (p > 0.05).

The postoperative ISQ values were found to be 79.40 ± 2.604 for the study group and 73.50 ± 5.226 for the control group at 1st week, 78.60 ± 3.136 for the study group and 73.45 ± 5.680 for the control group at 4th week (Table 2). It was determined that the differences between the groups were statistically significant (p < 0.05) and the ISQ measurements at week 1 and week 4 were notably higher in the study group (Fig. 4).

The increase and decrease rates of ISQ values between periods were evaluated by paired t test. Immediate postoperative measurements and 1st week measurements were compared. An increase of 1.40 ± 1.847 was observed in the study group while there was a decrease of 2.25 ± 1.713 in the control group; this difference was statistically significant (p < 0.001). When the difference between the immediate postoperative measures and the 4th week measurements were evaluated, an increase of 0.60 ± 2.798 was observed in the study group while a decrease of 2.30 ± 2.774 was observed in the control group; this difference was statistically significant (p = 0.002). When the difference between the measurements of the control group and the study group at 1st week and 4th week was evaluated, a decrease of 0.05 ± 1.572 was observed in the control group while a decrease of 0.80 ± 2.215 was observed in the study group; this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.224) (Table 3).

Serial posts:


id post:
New thoughts
Me:
search
glossary
en in