ytology & f C H i o s l t a o n l o r g u y o J Sezavar, et al., J Cytol Histol 2015, S3:1 Journal of Cytology & Histology DOI: 10.4172/2157-7099.S3-009 ISSN: 2157-7099 Research Article Open Access Socket Preservation: Allograft vs. Alloplast Mehdi Sezavar1, Behnam Bohlouli1, Mohammad Hosein Kalantar Motamedi1*, Jahanfar Jahanbani2 and Masoud Shah Hosseini3 1OMFS Department, Azad University of Medical Sciences, Tehran Dental branch, IR Iran 2Department of pathology, Azad University of Medical Sciences, Tehran Dental branch, IR Iran 3Dental student, Azad University of Medical Sciences, Tehran Dental branch, IR Iran *Corresponding author: Motamedi MHK, OMFS Department, Azad University of Medical Sciences, Tehran Dental branch, Iran, Tel: 98- 9121937154; E-mail:
[email protected] Rec date: Apr 09, 2015, Acc date: Apr 21, 2015, Pub date: Apr 23, 2015 Copyright: © 2015 Sezavar M, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Abstract Background: The volume shrinkage of the alveolar ridge might be minimized by the ridge preservation stages and applied biomaterials, after tooth extraction. Objectives: The aim of this study is to compare alloplastic with allograft in terms of preservation and bone regeneration of the alveolar ridge after tooth extraction. Materials and Methods: This study clinically assessed this issue via the Split Mouth method which assessed 10 dental sockets filled with alloplasts and 9 others with allografts postextraction. The effectiveness of each material was clinically and histologically processed.