A Comparison of Freeze–Dried Bone Allograft and Demineralized Freeze–Dried Bone Allograft in Human Periodontal Osseous Defects

Abstract

This study was conducted to clinically compare freeze-dried bone allograft (FDBA) and demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft (DFDBA). Twenty-two defects (11 intrapatient pairs) in 9 patients were grafted with either DFDBA or FDBA. Evaluations were based on standardized radiographs, presurgical and postsurgical soft tissue measurements using the cemento-enamel junction as a fixed reference point, and osseous measurements at the time of surgery. Grafted sites were re-entered at a minimum of 6 months following placement. A mean osseous repair of 1.7 mm (59%) occurred with DFDBA and 2.4 mm (66%) with FDBA. A mean clinical attachment gain of 1.7 mm was obtained with DFDBA and 2.0 mm with FDBA. Probing depths decreased a mean of 2.00 mm with both DFDBA and FDBA. These findings reveal no significant differences between the two materials in primarily intraosseous defects when evaluated at a minimum 6 months postsurgery.

Comparison of the bone healing capacity of autogenous bone, demineralized freeze dried bone allograft, and collagen sponge in repairing rabbit cranial defects

“…It contains collagen type I (85-95%) and collagen type II (5-15%) 2,3,7,13 . To date, there have been lots of studies wherein the observation of bone healing is done after grafting DFDBA to the bone defects [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9] . The results of research on the bone formation ability of collagen sponge have also been reported recently, but there has been no study on the comparison of collagen sponge with bone healing after grafting autogenous bone or DFDBA.…”

“…Thus, bone graft using various kinds of graft materials has been performed to restore bone defect sites. Experimental and clinical research studies seeking the best treatment method of restoring bone defects in the oral and maxillofacial area have been attempted, and efforts to find an ideal treatment method have been made continuously [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] . The various bone graft materials being applied on bone defect sites form bones through three independent processes: bone formation, bone induction, and bone conduction 2,3,17,18 .…”

“…For such regeneration, numerous bone graft materials and bone substitutes have been utilized, and various success rates from those trials have been reported [1][2][3][4][5] . As the only one with bone formation ability among the bone graft materials in clinical use, autogenous…”

“…However, the autogenous bone graft method may cause some side effects such as patient discomfort, complication, infection, etc., on the donor site [3][4][5][6] . The advantage of allogenous bone graft materials obtainable from cadaver or other individual living donor of the same species is that they may be utilized immediately whenever necessary; surgery time for taking the bone to be grafted can also be reduced.…”

Distraction Osteogenesis in Implantology for Ridge Augmentation - A Systematic Review

“…Placement of implants may be prevented by inadequate bone dimensions unless the deficient areas have bone grafts placed or the inferior alveolar nerve repositioned [2]. In order to correct bone, it is important to carry out autogenous onlay bone grafts, guided bone regeneration, alloplastic augmentation and alveolar split grafting [3][4][5][6][7][8]. Each of these have their respective pros and cons.…”