الفهرس 
Histology of the socket and Histomorphometric analysis:Only 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 32 |  |  |
| | | from | 32 | | |
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to compare between using PRGF
and PRF in socket augmentation and their effect as a graft material and to
find the role of the growth factor in bone regeneration and its effect on
differentiation and maturation.
Thirty subjects were included in this study. They were divided into
three groups: group 1 included ten patients, their sockets augemented by
PRGF after extraction, group 2 included ten patients their sockets
augemented by PRF after extraction while group 3 included ten controls
not received any augementation after extraction.
Clinical parameters including; vertical bone height and bone width
were recorded at baseline and at 8 weeks after extraction. Moreover,
histomorphometric parameters including; total surface area, trabecular
bone size and area fraction of newly formed bone were measured at 8
weeks after extraction by histomorphometric analysis.
In the present study a core biopsy was taken after 8 weeks from
tooth extraction which has undergone histomorphometric analysis,
implant placement was also done at the same time.
In the present study we found that mean change in clinical
measurements of vertical bone height at the time of extraction and after 2
months was the least in PRGF group then PRF group and the biggest
difference was in control group with non-significant difference between
three groups.The aim of the present study was to compare between using PRGF
and PRF in socket augmentation and their effect as a graft material and to
find the role of the growth factor in bone regeneration and its effect on
differentiation and maturation.
Thirty subjects were included in this study. They were divided into
three groups: group 1 included ten patients, their sockets augemented by
PRGF after extraction, group 2 included ten patients their sockets
augemented by PRF after extraction while group 3 included ten controls
not received any augementation after extraction.
Clinical parameters including; vertical bone height and bone width
were recorded at baseline and at 8 weeks after extraction. Moreover,
histomorphometric parameters including; total surface area, trabecular
bone size and area fraction of newly formed bone were measured at 8
weeks after extraction by histomorphometric analysis.
In the present study a core biopsy was taken after 8 weeks from
tooth extraction which has undergone histomorphometric analysis,
implant placement was also done at the same time.
In the present study we found that mean change in clinical
measurements of vertical bone height at the time of extraction and after 2
months was the least in PRGF group then PRF group and the biggest
difference was in control group with non-significant difference between
three groups.The aim of the present study was to compare between using PRGF
and PRF in socket augmentation and their effect as a graft material and to
find the role of the growth factor in bone regeneration and its effect on
differentiation and maturation.
Thirty subjects were included in this study. They were divided into
three groups: group 1 included ten patients, their sockets augemented by
PRGF after extraction, group 2 included ten patients their sockets
augemented by PRF after extraction while group 3 included ten controls
not received any augementation after extraction.
Clinical parameters including; vertical bone height and bone width
were recorded at baseline and at 8 weeks after extraction. Moreover,
histomorphometric parameters including; total surface area, trabecular
bone size and area fraction of newly formed bone were measured at 8
weeks after extraction by histomorphometric analysis.
In the present study a core biopsy was taken after 8 weeks from
tooth extraction which has undergone histomorphometric analysis,
implant placement was also done at the same time.
In the present study we found that mean change in clinical
measurements of vertical bone height at the time of extraction and after 2
months was the least in PRGF group then PRF group and the biggest
difference was in control group with non-significant difference between
three groups.The aim of the present study was to compare between using PRGF
and PRF in socket augmentation and their effect as a graft material and to
find the role of the growth factor in bone regeneration and its effect on
differentiation and maturation.
Thirty subjects were included in this study. They were divided into
three groups: group 1 included ten patients, their sockets augemented by
PRGF after extraction, group 2 included ten patients their sockets
augemented by PRF after extraction while group 3 included ten controls
not received any augementation after extraction.
Clinical parameters including; vertical bone height and bone width
were recorded at baseline and at 8 weeks after extraction. Moreover,
histomorphometric parameters including; total surface area, trabecular
bone size and area fraction of newly formed bone were measured at 8
weeks after extraction by histomorphometric analysis.
In the present study a core biopsy was taken after 8 weeks from
tooth extraction which has undergone histomorphometric analysis,
implant placement was also done at the same time.
In the present study we found that mean change in clinical
measurements of vertical bone height at the time of extraction and after 2
months was the least in PRGF group then PRF group and the biggest
difference was in control group with non-significant difference between
three groups. In comparison, this study shows that the mean change in clinical
measurements of bone width immediate after extraction and after 2
months was the least in PRGF group then PRF group and the biggest in
the control group with significant difference between three groups.
In the present study histomorphometric analysis revealed a higher
mean surface area of newly formed bone in PRGF group compared to
that of PRF group with a non-significant statistical difference between
two groups, while the mean area in both groups showed a significant
difference when compared to that of control group.
The results also showed that trabecular size in PRF group was
larger than that in PRGF group with a significant difference between the
two groups and also between that of PRF compared to that of control
group. However, the mean trabecular size of PRGF group showed
insignificant difference with that of control group.
On the other hand, the mean area fraction of newly formed bone
showed the same results in both PRF and PRGF groups with insignificant
difference between both groups. Both groups showed significant
difference with that of control group.
Also, In the present study, histological analysis revealed more
osteoblastic rimming around newly formed bone trabeculae, larger
lacunae for osteocytes and also the blood vessels were more and largersized
in PRF and PRGF groups compared to control group.