Volumetric Bone Regeneration Of Maxillary Cystic Defect Grafted With Mineralized Plasmatic Matrix Versus Nano Crystalline Hydroxyapatite Bone Graft Mixed With Platelet Rich Fibrin A Randomized Clinical Trial

ElSayed, Omnia; Mohamed Hossam Eldin, Ahmed; Mansour, Mahitab; Mohamed Chehata, Ingy; Almoghazy, Hinar

doi:10.21608/msadj.2024.295721.1038

Volumetric Bone Regeneration Of Maxillary Cystic Defect Grafted With Mineralized Plasmatic Matrix Versus Nano Crystalline Hydroxyapatite Bone Graft Mixed With Platelet Rich Fibrin A Randomized Clinical Trial

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

¹ Department of oral & maxillofacial surgery .MSA university

² MSA University

³ Lecturer of dental biomaterials, Faculty of Dentistry, MSA University

⁴ Associate Professor of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, MSA University

⁵ Lecturer, Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry. October University for Modern Sciences and Arts, Giza, Egypt.

10.21608/msadj.2024.295721.1038

Abstract

Background: One of the most prevalent conditions in the oral and maxillofacial region is jaw cysts. Enucleation of cysts is a commonly embraced treatment method which may result in bony irregularities that need to be filled with grafting material. The purpose of this study was to evaluate bone regeneration of maxillary cystic defects grafted with mineralized Plasmatic matrix in comparison to nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite bone graft mixed with platelet rich fibrin.
Patients & Methods: a randomized controlled clinical trial conducted on 16 subjects (6 females and 10 males) collected from the outpatient clinic of the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, October University of Modern Sciences and Arts. Allocated to one of two equal groups: Group (I): received a mineralized Plasmatic matrix (MPM). Group (II): received a nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite (nHA) bone graft mixed with platelet-rich fibrin. Defects sizes, volumetric bone fill & bone density will be evaluated by CBCT at 6 months post-operative to determine the amount of bone fill & healing.

Results: Indicate improvements in the healing of bone defects and increase in bone density observed in both MPM group & nHA group. nHA group showed statistically significant decrease of cyst sizes & volume than MPM group. In terms of bone density nHA group had statistically significant higher density levels than MPM.

Conclusion: It was concluded that cavities filled with a combination of nHA mixed with PRF achieved better bone fill compared to those treated with MPM.

Keywords