Chinese Journal of Oral Implantology ›› 2024, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (1): 49-55.DOI: 10.12337/zgkqzzxzz.2024.02.009

• Original Articles·Clinical Research • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Comparison of the clinical effects of two different wound closure methods in extraction site preservation of maxillary molars

Liu Zongyi1, Zhang Qingbin1, Ye Zhanchao2, Yu Changying1, Liu Wanqing1   

  1. 1Department of Stomatology, Xiamen Humanity Hospital, Fujian Medical University, Xiamen 361000, China;
    2Department of Stomatology, Zhongshan Hospital Affiliated to Xiamen University, Xiamen 361004, China
  • Received:2023-08-10 Online:2024-02-29 Published:2024-03-07
  • Contact: Liu Zongyi, Email: liuzongyi77@163.com, Tel: 0086-592-5262330
  • Supported by:
    2020 Xiamen Medical and Health Guiding Project(3502Z20209074)

Abstract: Objective To assess the clinical effects of concentrated growth factor (CGF) and free gingival grafting (FGG) in combination with Bio-Oss Collagen in extraction site preservation after maxillary molar extraction. Methods Thirty patients were randomly divided into two groups. The tooth sockets were filled with Bio-Oss Collagen, and then the wounds were closed using either CGF or FGG. Postoperative wound healing and the width of keratinized gingival tissue were observed, while CBCT was used to evaluate the changes in the alveolar bone and maxillary sinus floor. Results Group B exhibited a higher rate of wound healing compared to group A (P<0.05). The width of keratinized gingival decreased by (0.79±0.16) mm in group A and (0.35±0.18) mm in group B, respectively (P<0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding changes in alveolar bone or maxillary sinus floor (P>0.05). Conclusion Both CGF and FGG combined with Bio-Oss Collagen effectively reduced bone resorption during ridge preservation after maxillary molar extraction, with no significant differences observed in alveolar bone or maxillary sinus floor changes between the two groups. However, FGG demonstrated better wound healing rates and less reduction of buccal keratinized gingival compared to CGF.

Key words: Extraction site preservation, Concentrated growth factor, Free gingival graft, Maxillary molar