Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Introduction: Peri-implantitis is a serious complication in dental implantology that, if left untreated, may lead to implant loss and systemic diseases. Effective regeneration of bone defects resulting from peri-implantitis is crucial to maintaining the functionality of dental implants. Purpose of the Study: The study aimed to compare the effectiveness of fine-particle dentin and Bio-Oss in the reconstruction of bone defects caused by peri-implantitis. Materials and Methods: The study included a comprehensive radiological assessment of changes in bone density over time. Bone density was assessed using Hounsfield Units (HUs) as a measure of bone attenuation, with radiological assessments performed at 8- and 12-week intervals during the healing process. The study included participants ranging in age from 30 to 65 years. Fifty-seven patients were divided into three groups: 22 patients received small-particle dentin, 15 received Bio-Oss, and 20 controls without bone substitute material. Results: The fine-dentin group showed a 20% increase in bone density after 8 weeks (p < 0.05), while the Bio-Oss group showed a 15% increase after 12 weeks (p < 0.05). The control group showed minimal changes in bone density (5% after 12 weeks), which was not statistically significant. Clinical evaluations showed 95% successful integration in the fine dentin group, 85% in the Bio-Oss group, and 70% in the control group. The fine-dentin group showed a 20% increase in bone density after 8 weeks (p < 0.05), while the Bio-Oss group showed a 15% increase after 12 weeks (p < 0.05). The control group showed minimal changes in bone density (5% after 12 weeks), which was not statistically significant. Clinical evaluations showed 95% successful integration in the fine-dentin group, 85% in the Bio-Oss group, and 70% in the control group. Conclusions: Both fine-particle dentin and Bio-Oss significantly improved bone density compared to the control group. Fine-particle dentin is suitable for immediate bone regeneration due to its rapid initial regeneration, while Bio-Oss provides long-term support, ideal for maintaining implant stability over a longer period of time. The results highlight the importance of selecting appropriate bone replacement materials depending on the clinical scenario to improve patient outcomes after dental implant placement.
Łobacz et al. (Thu,) studied this question.