Comparison of clinical efficacy of three different dentin matrix biomaterials obtained from different devices

ABSTRACT

Aim

The aim of the present study was to propose the clinical efficacy of the different dentin matrix obtained from three devices (BonMaker, Tooth Transformer, and Smart Dentin Grinder) and to show their morphological, physical, and biochemical characteristics using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), energy-dispersive X-ray (EDX) spectroscopy, and Raman spectroscopy.

Research design and methods

The study included 70 patients who underwent bone augmentation using the BonMaker, Tooth Transformer, and Smart Dentin Grinder devices. In addition, 84 implants were placed. Furthermore, four samples, one for each device and one non-demineralized control, were analyzed with scanning electron microscopy (SEM), energy-dispersive X-ray analysis, and Raman spectroscopy.

Results

In all patients, augmentation of bone defects with ground dentin matrix was successful, and implants showed correct osseointegration. The morphological organization, the chemical composition, and the presence of organic molecules in the dentin samples processed by the three different devices were demonstrated using SEM, energy-dispersive X-ray analysis, and Raman spectroscopy.

Conclusions

Comparing BonMaker, Tooth Transformer, and Smart Dentin Grinder devices in our practice, we concluded that these systems, even with different structural and chemical differences of the dentin granules, have a comparable potential for obtaining regenerative material from the patient’s own teeth.

KEYWORDS:

• Demineralized dentin matrix
• autogenous tooth graft
• tooth grinders
• scanning electron microscopy
• energy-dispersive X-ray analysis
• Raman spectroscopy

View correction statement:

Correction

Declaration of interest

The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties.

Reviewers disclosure

Peer reviewers on this manuscript have no relevant financial relationships or otherwise to disclose.

Author contributions

Conception and design: R Dłucik, B Orzechowska-Wylęgała, G Acri

Data analysis: D Dłucik, D Puzzolo

Data interpretation: R Dłucik, B Orzechowska-Wylęgała, D Dłucik, D Puzzolo, A Micali, Testagrossa, B, G Acri,

Drafting of the paper: R Dłucik, B Orzechowska-Wylęgała, A Micali, G Acri

Critical review and revision the paper: R Dłucik, B Orzechowska-Wylęgała, D Dłucik, D Puzzolo, A Micali, G Acri

Final approval of the version to be published: R Dłucik, B Orzechowska-Wylęgała, D Dłucik, D Puzzolo, A Micali, Testagrossa, B, G Acri

Data Availability Statement

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the present study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Ethical approval

The study was approved by the Bioethical Commission of Medical University of Silesia in Katowice, Poland, No. KNW/0022/KBI/18/18 SUM of 15.05.2018 and carried out in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The informed consent was obtained from all the subjects enrolled after an explanation of the nature and the possible consequences of the study. Only adult patients (over 18 years old) were considered in the study. The study was performed by two centers: Dłucik Dental Clinic, Katowice, Poland, and by researchers from the University of Messina, Messina, Italy.

Correction Statement

This article was originally published with errors, which have now been corrected in the online version. Please see Correction (http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17434440.2023.2253080)

Additional information

Funding

This paper was not funded.