## 3 Results  
The one-year follow-up period was completed by 11-11 patients in both groups. Regarding the sex and age of patients and the angulation and depth of impaction of third molars, the two groups were statistically identical (Table 1). The VAS scores (control, 5.55 \(\pm\) 2.11; graft, 4.73 \(\pm\) 2.10) and the painkiller consumption of the two groups did not show significant differences. The macromorphology of the regenerated bone was different in the two groups (Figure 2, Table 2). In the control group, the homogenous trabecular bone formation could be seen in all cases. Continuous cortical bone covered the surgical sockets in 68.19%, and it was fenestrated in 31.82%. The density of the newly formed bone was 176.41 \(\pm\) 107.98 HU. In the graft group, the socket was filled with homogenous trabecular bone in 36.37%, graft remnants could be seen in 50% of patients, and demarcated bone graft particles occurred in 13.64%. The overlying cortical bone was continuous in 4.55% and fenestrated in 54.55%. The augmented area was not covered by cortical bone in 40.91%. The density of the newly formed bone was 370.14 \(\pm\) 184.39 HU and 718.67 \(\pm\) 306.41 HU for the graft remnants. The result of the micromorphometric analysis can be seen in Figure 3. BS/BV and Po(tot) were significantly higher at the control group showing the high volume and number of resorption lacunae. Tb.Th and Tb.N were significantly higher at the graft group, referring to a denser bone structure and also to the graft remnants. BV/TV of the grafted and test groups were 28.01 \(\pm\) 7.43% and 9.49 \(\pm\) 6.12%, respectively. BS/BV, Tb.Th, and Tb.N showed normal distribution with Shapiro-Wilk test, while the one-way ANOVA test was used to validate significance. Po(tot) was analysed by a Mann-Whitney-U test since it showed a non-normal distribution. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline  & & **Control** & **Graft** \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{sex} & male & 2 & 3 \\ \cline{2-4}  & female & 9 & 8 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{age} & mean & 22.55 & 23.18 \\ \cline{2-4}  & SD & 2.07 & 1.94 \\ \cline{2-4}  & min & 19 & 20 \\ \cline{2-4}  & max & 26 & 27 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{angulation of third molar} & vertical & 3 & 2 \\ \cline{2-4}  & mesioangular & 4 & 3 \\ \cline{2-4}  & distoangular & 0 & 0 \\ \cline{2-4}  & horizontal & 3 & 5 \\ \cline{2-4}  & transversal & 1 & 1 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{depth of impaction of third molar} & I & 1 & 2 \\ \cline{2-4}  & II & 5 & 4 \\ \cline{2-4}  & III & 5 & 5 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Data of patients and the position of the third molars. Depth of impaction was classified according to [PERSON] (1926) and [PERSON] (1942). The meaning of numbers: (I) third molar reaches occlusion; (II) third molar is between the occlusion and the neck of the second molar; and (III) third molar is below the neck of the second molar. After one year, the vertical bone loss at the buccal site of the removed third molar was significantly higher when alveolar preservation was not applied. The Shapiro-Wilk test showed non-normal distribution, and thus the Mann-Whitney-U test was used to validate data significance. Horizontal bone reduction data showed normal distribution. One-way ANOVA analysis did not provide significant differences, although higher bone loss could be observed when bone grafting was not applied (Figure 4, Table 3).