Prognosis recovery score of apical surgery Guided Bone Regeneration using cone beam computed tomography and digital bioinformatics

Pablo Rodríguez; Isabel Adler; María Lorena Cabirta; Eugenia Miklaszewski; Nicolás Alfie; Andrea Muiño; Sara Chulián; Cristóbal Fresno; Valeria Denninghoff

doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e33033

Prognosis recovery score of apical surgery Guided Bone Regeneration using cone beam computed tomography and digital bioinformatics

Heliyon. 2024 Jun 15;10(12):e33033. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e33033. eCollection 2024 Jun 30.

Authors

Pablo Rodríguez¹, Isabel Adler¹, María Lorena Cabirta¹, Eugenia Miklaszewski¹, Nicolás Alfie¹, Andrea Muiño¹, Sara Chulián², Cristóbal Fresno³, Valeria Denninghoff^{4

5}

Affiliations

¹ Faculty of Dentistry, University of Buenos Aires (UBA), Argentina.
² Andalusian Public Foundation Progress and Health - Andalusian Regional Government (FPS), Sevilla, Spain.
³ Health Sciences Research Center (CICSA), Anáhuac University Mexico, Mexico.
⁴ Molecular-Clinical Lab-University of Buenos Aires (UBA) - National Council for Scientific and Technical Research (CONICET), Argentina.
⁵ Liquid Biopsy and Cancer Interception Group, Centre for Genomics and Oncological Research-Pfizer-University of Granada - Andalusian Regional Government (GENyO), Granada, Spain.

Abstract

Objective: Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR) is a dental surgical procedure that uses barrier membranes to prevent soft tissue invasion and conduct new bone growth. This study aimed to define a Prognosis Recovery score (PR score) to objectively classify post-surgery responders from non-responder patients who underwent GBR using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT).

Methods: This prospective-observational-longitudinal-cohort study recruited 250 individuals who were assigned to: Conventional-Apical-Surgery (CAS, n = 39), Apical-Surgery using human fascia lata Membrane placement (ASM, n = 42), and Apical-Surgery using human fascia lata Membrane placement and lyophilized allograft Bone powder (ASMB, n = 39); and Apical-Surgery using collagen membrane Porcine origin and Bovine Bone-matrix (ASPBB, n = 130), an independent external validation cohort. Surgery was performed, and evolution was monitored by CBCTs at 0, 6-, 12-, 18-, and 24 months post-surgery.

Results: Normalized lesion volumes were calculated, and non-linear time evolution morphology curves were characterized. The three-time evolution bone growth patterns were: a linear tendency (PR0), "S'' shaped log-logistic (PR1), and "C" cellular growth (PR2). The treatment success rates were PR2-46 %, PR2-88 %, and PR2-95 %/PR1-5% for CAS, ASM, and ASMB groups. The xenograft ASPBB counterpart achieved PR2-92 % and PR1-8%. The score PR had a sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 100 %.

Conclusions: Patients' treatment success can be quantitatively, objectively, and precisely predicted with the Prognosis Recovery score (using only two CBCTs), according to their biological response to allograft or xenograft materials (time-evolution bone growth curves), reducing cost and radiation exposure.

Clinical significance: Through digital imaging and bioinformatic analysis of bone regeneration observed in CBCTs, we defined a Prognosis Recovery (PR) score using only two CBCT volume assessments (0 and 6 months). The PR score allowed us to define three time-evolution curves depending on the biomaterials used and to classify patients in a quantitative, objective, and accurate way.

Keywords: Bone graft(s); Bone remodeling/regeneration; Computed tomography; Dental informatics/bioinformatics; Digital imaging/radiology.