Search

Abstract Majority of previous studies on alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) used collagen membranes as barrier membranes, and further evidence for ARP in dehiscent extraction sockets with a deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) and matrix is needed. The aim of this study is to assess the impact of non-cross linked collagen membranes (membrane) and crosslinked collagen matrices (matrix) on ARP using DBBM in extraction sockets with buccal dehiscence. In six mongrel dogs, the mesial roots of three mandibular premolars (P2, P3, and P4) were extracted 1 month after dehiscence defect induction. Two experimental groups were randomly assigned: (1) DBBM with a membrane (DBBM/membrane group) and (2) DBBM with a matrix (DBBM/matrix group). Three-dimensional (3D) volumetric, microcomputed tomography (μCT), and histologic analyses were performed to assess the ridge preservation. Both groups were effective to maintain the ridge width (p > 0.05), and the DBBM/matrix group showed more favorable soft tissue regeneration and bone quality in the histological analysis (p = 0.05). Based on these results, DBBM/matrix could be better choice for ARP in cases of buccal dehiscence defects.

Objectives: To evaluate the volumetric effect and biocompatibility of porcine tendon-derived type I collagen matrix graft (CG) in gingival biotype modification (GBM) compared with subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) in a beagle model. Methods: Surface analysis using scanning electron microscopy and a collagen degradation assay of CG was performed in vitro. Six adult dogs were used in in vivo experiment, and each received autologous SCTG or CG at the anterior side. Histometric and three-dimensional digital volume analyses were conducted to compare quantitative changes in CG and SCTG in GBM. Immunohistochemical analysis was performed for the qualitative evaluation of CG compared to SCTG. Results: CG had a double-layered structure, and its degradation was slower than that of other well-reported materials. No critical problems were associated with the healing procedure. Changes in gingival thickness and volume in the CG and SCTG groups were equivalent, with no significant differences between the groups. Type I collagen and vascular endothelial growth factor expression levels were similar in both groups. Significance: CG and SCTG had equivalent potential for GBM in terms of quantity and quality. Additionally, CG could be used as a reasonable substitute for SCTG, making surgery convenient and predicting successful clinical outcomes.

Several in vitro and in vivo studies have evaluated the effect of probiotics on oral health; however, human clinical studies are still limited. Therefore, this study aimed to examine the effects of Weissella cibaria Chonnam Medical University (CMU)-containing tablets on halitosis. This randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study included 100 adults with halitosis (age, 20–70 years). The participants were randomly assigned to the test group (n = 50) and control group (n = 50). One tablet [1 × 108 colony forming units (CFU)/tablet] was to be taken each day over 8 weeks. The concentrations of volatile sulfur compounds (VSCs), bad breath improvement scores, and oral colonization of W. cibaria were measured. Psychosocial indicators including depression, self-esteem, oral health-related quality of life, and subjective oral health status were evaluated. Most variables were assessed at baseline, 4, and 8 weeks, and W. cibaria number and safety variables were assessed at baseline and 8 weeks. Intergroup comparisons were carried out using Student’s t-test, Chi-square test, or Fisher’s exact test on per-protocol analysis. Intragroup differences before and after intake were analyzed using the linear mixed-effect model (LMM). Per-protocol analysis was carried out in the test group (n = 45) and control group (n = 46). Total VSC was significantly lower in the probiotics group than in the placebo group at baseline (week 0, p = 0.046) and at 8 weeks (p = 0.017). The sum of hydrogen sulfide and methyl mercaptan did not differ significantly between the groups at baseline; however, it was significantly lower in the probiotics group than in the placebo group at week 8 (p = 0.012). Bad breath improvement (BBI) scores were significantly reduced at week 8 (p = 0.006) in the probiotics group. Statistically significant intergroup differences were observed for changes in the level of W. cibaria at week 8 (p