Objectives: This study was conducted to assess and compare the effect of autogenous bone
graft versus mineralized plasmatic matrix (MPM) and versus the Nano hydroxyapatite bone graft
as bone regenerative materials during immediate implant placement.
Material and Methods: A total of 14 patients with 18 implants have been included in this
study, patients were divided into 3 groups. Group I(control group) received autogenous bone graft.
Group II (study group A) received Mineralized Plasmatic Matrix (MPM), and group III (study
group B) received Nano hydroxyapatite as bone regenerative materials for immediate implant
placement. The treatment outcome was evaluated clinically and radiographically at 3 and 6 months
of implant placement. Implants stability was measured using Osstell radiofrequency device at 3 and
6 months postoperatively. Also bone density were measured radiographically at 2 weeks and at 3
and 6 months postoperatively and statistically analysed.
Results: Statistical analysis of bone density measurements between the three groups showed
significant difference (P ≤ 0.05) between the control autogenous bone group and the two other
groups (MPM &Nano bone) at all time intervals. Comparison between the test groups revealed
non-significant difference (P ≤ 0.05) between (MPM & Nano bone) at two weeks interval. While
at three & six months postoperatively there was a significant difference (P ≤ 0.05 between the two
groups. Regarding implant stability comparison between the three groups , there was no statistical
significant difference between them (P ≤ 0.05) at three and six months post operatively.
Conclusion: The autogenous bone graft remains the gold standard for grafting materials but the
use of MPM and Nano hydroxyapatite grafting materials can also give successful results regarding
implant stability and bone density.