Journal of Isfahan Medical School

Journal of Isfahan Medical School

Efficacy of demineralized bone matrix putty and demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft compared to extraction alone in alveolar ridge and soft tissue preservation: A controlled clinical trial

Document Type : Original Article (s)

Authors
Leila Golpasandhagh 1
Neda Samie 2
Zahra Akbari 2
1 Associate Professor, Department of Periodontology, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Periodontology, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran
10.48305/jims.v44.i876.1622
Abstract
Background : This study compares Ceno bone biomaterial with demineralized bone matrix putty in preserving the alveolar ridge and soft tissue after tooth extraction.
Methods: We conducted a randomized controlled trial involving 36 single-rooted teeth designated as non-restorable (30 completed the 4-month follow-up). Extraction sites were randomly assigned to one of three groups: demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft (CenoBone, n = 10), demineralized bone matrix putty (DBM putty, n = 10), and a control group without grafts (n = 10). After extraction and 4 months post-extraction horizontal and vertical ridge dimensions were assessed using calipers and an acrylic stent. Before extraction and 4 months later, impressions were made and scanned using an intraoral scanner (CS3600, Carestream Dental) to generate STL files for volumetric analysis using exocad 3.0 software. Descriptive statistics, paired t-tests, and ANOVA Repeated Measures were conducted.
Results: Ridge width decreased in the CenoBone group from 7.06 ± 0.46 mm to 5.59 ± 0.53 mm (P < 0.001), in the DBM putty group from 6.98 ± 0.5 mm to 5.54 ± 0.51 mm, and in the control group from 7.22 ± .46 mm to 5.72 ± 0.46 mm (P < 0.001). All groups experienced width loss, but no significant difference was found between the two grafted groups (P=/0834). Vertical changes of buccal crest were -1.18 ± 0.36 mm (CenoBone), -1.21 ± 0.51 mm (DBM putty), and -2.04 ± 0.71 mm (control) (P < 0.05). Volumetric soft tissue changes at 4 months post-extraction in three dimensions were -0.58 mm (CenoBone), -0.54 mm (DBM putty), and -1.80 mm (control). Significant differences were observed between the grafted groups and the control, but not between the grafted groups.
Conclusion: Both demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft and demineralized bone matrix putty significantly enhanced ridge preservation compared to extraction alone, However, no statistically significant difference was observed between the two test groups. These preserved dimensions are more favorable for subsequent implant placement, particularly in areas where loss of ridge height may compromise the esthetic outcome. Although ridge preservation techniques were unable to completely compensate for the reduction in soft-tissue volume, contour shrinkage was significantly less pronounced than in sites undergoing natural healing following tooth extraction.

Highlights

Leila Golpasandhagh: Google Scholar , PubMed

Neda Samie: Google Scholar , PubMed

Keywords
Alveolar
ridge
preservation
Bone substitutes
Dimensional.tekrar
Subjects
1.     Avila-Ortiz G, Couso-Queiruga E, Stuhr S, Chambrone L. Long‐term outcomes of post‐extraction alveolar ridge preservation and alveolar ridge reconstruction followed by delayed implant placement: A systematic review. Periodontol 2025.
2.     Araújo MG, Lindhe J. Dimensional ridge alterations following tooth extraction. An experimental study in the dog. J Clin Periodontol 2005. 32(2): 212-8.
3.     Tan WL, Wong TLT,  Wong MCM, Lang NP. A systematic review of post‐extractional alveolar hard and soft tissue dimensional changes in humans. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012:23(Suppl 5): 1-21.
4.     Block MS. Foundations For Long Term Implant Success–a narrative review. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2026; 84(6): 907-14.
5.     Spinato S, Galindo-Moreno P, Zaffe D, Bernardello F, Soardi CM. Is socket healing conditioned by buccal plate thickness? A clinical and histologic study 4 months after mineralized human bone allografting. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014; 25(2): e120-e126.
6.     Iasella JM, Greenwell H, Miller RL, Hill M, Drisko C, Bohra AA, et al. Ridge preservation with freeze‐dried bone allograft and a collagen membrane compared to extraction alone for implant site development: A clinical and histologic study in humans. J Periodontol 2003; 74(7): 990-9.
7.     Engler-Hamm D, Cheung WS, Yen A, Stark PC, Griffin T. Ridge preservation using a composite bone graft and a bioabsorbable membrane with and without primary wound closure: a comparative clinical trial. J Periodontol 2011; 82(3): 377-87.
8.     Ferrus J, Cecchinato D, Pjetursson EB, Lang NP, Sanz M, Lindhe J. Factors influencing ridge alterations following immediate implant placement into extraction sockets. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010; 21(1): 22-9.
9.     Guarnieri R, Stefanelli L, De Angelis F, Mencio F, Pompa G, Di Carlo S. Extraction socket preservation using porcine-derived collagen membrane alone or associated with porcine-derived bone. Clinical results of randomized controlled study. J Oral Maxillofac Res 2017; 8(3): e5.
10.  Cardaropoli D, Tamagnone L, Roffredo A, Gaveglio L. Relationship between the buccal bone plate thickness and the healing of postextraction sockets with/without ridge preservation. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2014; 34(2): 211-7.
11.  Avila-Ortiz G, Chambrone L, Vignoletti F. Effect of alveolar ridge preservation interventions following tooth extraction: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. J Clin Periodontol 2019:46(Suppl 21): 195-23.
12.  Araújo MG, Costa da Silva JC, de Mendonça AF, Lindhe J. Ridge alterations following grafting of fresh extraction sockets in man. A randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Re 2015; 26(4): 407-12.
13.  Aimetti M, Romano F, Baima Griga F, Godio L. Clinical and histologic healing of human extraction sockets filled with calcium sulfate. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009; 24(5): 902-9.
14.  Barone A, Toti P, Menchini-Fabris GB, Derchi G, Marconcini S, Covani U. Extra oral digital scanning and imaging superimposition for volume analysis of bone remodeling after tooth extraction with and without 2 types of particulate porcine mineral insertion: A randomized controlled trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2017; 19(4): 750-9.
15.  Thalmair T, Fickl S, Schneider D, Hinze M, Wachtel H. Dimensional alterations of extraction sites after different alveolar ridge preservation techniques–a volumetric study. J Clin Periodontol 2013; 40(7): 721-7.
16.  Schneider D, Schmidlin PR, Philipp A, Annen BM, Ronay V, Hämmerle CHF , et al., Labial soft tissue volume evaluation of different techniques for ridge preservation after tooth extraction: a randomized controlled clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol 2014; 41(6): 612-7.
17.  Bender SA, Rogalski JB, Mills MP, Arnold RM, Cochran DL, Mellonig JT. Evaluation of demineralized bone matrix paste and putty in periodontal intraosseous defects. J Periodontol 2005; 76(5): 768-77.
18.  Sarkarat F, Sadri D, Bohlooli B, Lozani S. Ridge preservation with OSSEO+ compared to Cenobone for implant site development: a clinical and histologic study in humans [in Persian]. J Res Dent Sci 2010; 7(3): 1-6.
Journal of Isfahan Medical School
Volume 44, Issue 876
3rd Week, October
September and October 2026
Pages 1622-1633

  • Receive Date 26 August 2026
  • Accept Date 19 October 2026