Search: onr:"swepub:oai:DiVA.org:uu-16602" > Bone substitutes an...
Fältnamn | Indikatorer | Metadata |
---|---|---|
000 | 03089naa a2200289 4500 | |
001 | oai:DiVA.org:uu-16602 | |
003 | SwePub | |
008 | 080529s2008 | |||||||||||000 ||eng| | |
024 | 7 | a https://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-166022 URI |
024 | 7 | a https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0757.2008.00251.x2 DOI |
040 | a (SwePub)uu | |
041 | a engb eng | |
042 | 9 SwePub | |
072 | 7 | a ref2 swepub-contenttype |
072 | 7 | a art2 swepub-publicationtype |
100 | 1 | a Hallman, Matsu Uppsala universitet,Centrum för klinisk forskning, Gävleborg4 aut0 (Swepub:uu)mahal425 |
245 | 1 0 | a Bone substitutes and growth factors as an alternative/complement to autogenous bone for grafting in implant dentistry |
264 | 1 | b Wiley,c 2008 |
338 | a print2 rdacarrier | |
520 | a Autogenous bone, with its osteogenic, osteoinductive and osteoconductive properties, has long been considered the ideal grafting material in bone reconstructive surgery (26, 85). However, drawbacks with autogenous bone include morbidity, availability and unpredictable graft resorption (85, 93, 94, 128, 167, 174). Recent advances in biotechnology have provided the implant surgeon with access to a great variety of bone grafting materials and the possibility of easier implant treatment for the patient as well as for the surgeon. However, the perfect grafting material has yet to be identified. Current research focuses on proteins and carriers for delivering growth factors to the surgical site; however, drawbacks of high production costs and unpredictable results exist. The clinical usefulness of a great variety of materials for bone augmentation in implant dentistry has been seriously questioned (56). The use of osteconductive osteobiologics in implant dentistry remains an experimental procedure until more knowledge becomes available regarding the clinical and biologic aspects of these materials. Osteoinduction denotes a process of accelerated bone formation that provides an abbreviated healing period. Using solely an osteoconductive grafting material may prolong the healing period with 2–6 months, which may be of clinical significance. Uncontrolled case reports, which suggest a graft healing period of 3–4 months for osteoconductive deproteinized bovine bone or biphasic materials, may mislead the inexperienced dentist. Furthermore, clinical recommendations seem premature when based upon a few animal studies rather than upon comprehensive long-term investigations in humans. This review discusses clinical studies of bone substitutes, growth factors and bone graft procedures employed with the purpose of augmenting periimplant sites. | |
653 | a MEDICINE | |
653 | a MEDICIN | |
700 | 1 | a Thor, Andreasu Uppsala universitet,Käkkirurgi4 aut0 (Swepub:uu)antho193 |
710 | 2 | a Uppsala universitetb Centrum för klinisk forskning, Gävleborg4 org |
773 | 0 | t Periodontology 2000d : Wileyg 47:1, s. 172-92q 47:1<172-92x 0906-6713x 1600-0757 |
856 | 4 8 | u https://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-16602 |
856 | 4 8 | u https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0757.2008.00251.x |
Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.
Copy and save the link in order to return to this view