| Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3115484 | American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics | 2016 | 10 Pages |
•We studied periodontal tissue changes of moving teeth into BoneCeramic grafted alveolar defects.•We evaluated dynamic bone microstructures and root resorption with micro-CT in rats.•Orthodontic loading affects bone microstructure changes and root resorption during tooth movement.•BoneCeramic has better osteoconductive potential and causes less root resorption than Bio-Oss.
IntroductionBoneCeramic (Straumann, Basel, Switzerland) can regenerate bone in alveolar defects after tooth extraction, but it is unknown whether it is feasible to move a tooth through BoneCeramic grafting sites. The objective of this study was to investigate 3-dimensional real-time root resorption and bone responses in grafted sites during orthodontic tooth movement.MethodsSixty 5-week-old rats were randomly assigned to 3 groups to receive BoneCeramic, natural bovine cancellous bone particles (Bio-Oss; Geistlich Pharma, Wolhusen, Switzerland), or no graft, after the extraction of the maxillary left first molar. After 4 weeks, the maxillary left second molar was moved into the extraction site for 28 days. Dynamic bone microstructures and root resorption were evaluated using in-vivo microcomputed tomography. Stress distribution and corresponding tissue responses were examined by the finite element method and histology. Mixed model analysis of variance was performed to compare the differences among time points with Bonferroni post-hoc tests at the significance level of P <0.05.ResultsThe BoneCeramic group had the least amount of tooth movement and root resorption volumes and craters, and the highest bone volume fraction, trabecular number, and mean trabecular thickness, followed by the Bio-Oss and the control groups. The highest stress accumulated in the cervical region of the mesial roots.ConclusionsBoneCeramic has better osteoconductive potential and induces less root resorption compared with Bio-Oss grafting and naturally recovered extraction sites.
