Microbial flora of dentin of remote wisdom teeth

Cover Page

Abstract


The aim of our study was to study the microbial flora of autodentin of removed wisdom teeth and compare it with the microbial flora of the oral cavity in order to determineits safe use as graft for thereplacement of defects of the alveolar bone. Relevance. The dental dentin is close in organic and mineral composition to human bone tissue. A bone autograft is considered the “gold standard” for ridge augmentation. However, a bone autograft graft increases the morbidity of reconstructive operations, requiring the formation of a donor zone, which increases the feeling of discomfort and the patient’s rehabilitation time. Increases the risk of intra- and postoperative complications. Materials and methods. A group of patients with wisdom teeth to be removed had smears taken from the mucous membrane in the area of the extracted teeth. After that, the teeth were removed, crushed using a bone mill manually, or reduced to thin plates, placed in nutrient media and sent for microbiological examination. Conclusions. According to the microbiological study, the microflora of the oral cavity and the microbial flora of the extracted teeth were identical, only quantitative indicators differed.


About the authors

V. O. Sidorenko

Yevdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry

Author for correspondence.
Email: nika_sidorenko@mail.ru
Moscow, Russian Federation

A. M. Panin

Yevdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry

Email: nika_sidorenko@mail.ru
Moscow, Russian Federation

A. M. Tsitsiashvili

Yevdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry

Email: nika_sidorenko@mail.ru
Moscow, Russian Federation

M. S. Podporin

Yevdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry

Email: nika_sidorenko@mail.ru
Moscow, Russian Federation

References

  1. Tsymbalov O.V. Dental implantation in periodontal diseases. Krasnodar: Edvey, 2014. 192 p. (In Russ.)
  2. Pankratov A. S. , Lekishvili M. V. , Kopeckiy I.G. Bone grafting in dentistry and maxillofacial surgery. A guide for doctors. M.: Binom, 2011. 272 p. (In Russ.)
  3. Curie F., Hanzer T., Curie Ch. et al. Regenerative methods in implantology. M.: ABC, 2013. 511 p. (In Russ.)
  4. Tsitsiashvili A. M. , Panin A. M. , Shishkanov A.V. Assessment of the “trauma” of reconstructive operations in the field of the alveolar bone /part of the jaw. Russian Bulletin of Dental Implantology. 2017; 3—4(37—38):33—6. (In Russ.)
  5. Um IW, Kim YK, Mitsugi M. Demineralized dentin matrix scaffolds for alveolar bone engineering. The Journal of Indian Prosthodont Society 2017;17:120—7.
  6. Murata M., Akazawa T., Masaharu M. Human Dentin as Novel Biomaterial for Bone Regeneration. Biomaterials — Physics and Chemistry. InTech. 2011. 490 p.
  7. Kabir M., Murata M., Kusano K. et al. Autogenous Demineralized Dentin Graft for Third Molar Socket Regeneration — A Сase Report. Dentistry. 2015. 5: 343. doi: 10.4172/2161—1122.1000343
  8. Binderman I., Hallel G, Nardy C. et al. A Novel Procedure to Process Extracted Teeth for Immediate Grafting of Autogenous Dentin. JBR Journal of Interdisciplinary Medicine and Dental Science. 2014;2:154. doi: 10.4172/2376—032X.1000154

Statistics

Views

Abstract - 326

PDF (Russian) - 78

Cited-By


PlumX

Dimensions


Copyright (c) 2020 Sidorenko V.O., Panin A.M., Tsitsiashvili A.M., Podporin M.S.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies