Dentists have a limited choice of wound dressings for treating mucogingival defects. To date, most graft materials have been of a biologic origin, principally palatal mucosa. These autograft preparations cause increased patient pain due to creation of a second wound site and require more operator time. Other biologic graft materials, such as dura mater or bovine collagen preparations, have been used without striking success. Synthetic dressings such as Biobrane, Op-Site, or hydrogel materials have met with widespread success in plastic surgery, but have never been used to correct oral defects. These dressings are man-made; one, Biobrane, has a collagen coating on the wound surface side to promote adhesion. I would like to use the synthetic dressings for treatment of mucogingival defects in a canine model. We will evaluate the progress of healing in oral wounds by clinical examinations, histologically, and with biochemical techniques, in particular, by quantitating DNA synthesis as a measure of cell division, and protein synthesis, particularly collagen synthesis. The long-term objective is to test the utility of synthetic dressings as would covers for treating mucogingival defects. The synthetic dressings are inexpensive (410-22/sq. ft.) by comparison to human allograft ($100-300/sq. ft.), are readily available, and have an indefinite shelf life. If these materials are as good as biologic dressings for treating oral defects, they will become widely used and benefit both the patient and the dentist.
NIH ExPorter
NIH ExPorter