## 4 Discussion  
In the last ten years, different procedures have been suggested to preserve the bone volume after tooth extraction, and different biomaterials have been promoted for ASP surgical treatments, such as bovine bone particles (BBP) + socket sealing (SS), 90% bovine bone granules and 10% porcine collagen (BBG/PC) + SS, cortico-cancellous porcine bone particles (CPBP) + SS, allograft particles (AG) + SS, alloplastic material (AP) with or without SS, autologous blood-derived products (ABDP), cell therapy (CTh), recombinant morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) and SS alone [14]. In a recent histomorphometrical literature review, the different market graft materials were compared without showing the best biomaterial [15]. Recently, a three-punch alveolar ridge reconstruction (ARR) technique was clinically proposed to obtain predictable bone volume maintenance results. In 2022, [PERSON] proposed using a xenograft material covered with three reabsorbable membranes in ARP maxillary treatment [16]. Recently, in several ASP or ARP human studies, autologous demineralized dentin, obtained after tooth extraction, was used as a graft material and was investigated with clinical and histomorphometrical evaluation. Encouraging histological and histomorphometrical results of the bone biopsies have been shown in several publications [17; 18; 19]. Moreover, the differences between non-vital endodontic treated and vital whole teeth used as autologous graft materials in ASP procedures were described [17]. Also, [PERSON] et al. in 2021 showed a high implant survival rate 1 year after loading (98.2%) in maxillary regenerated sites with tooth used as a graft material [18]. Several studies have shown how the buccal plate thickness, the absence or the highly compromised buccal plate influence, the ridge augmentation shape and the dimensions of the autologous tooth matrix conditioned buccal bone resorption, and in one systematic review the buccal plate was related to different biomaterials [20; 21; 22; 23; 24]. No inflammation, infection or graft rejection were present after 14 implants without a bone buccal wall and filled using autologous tooth extracted-derived material. After 6 months, the bone resorption was measured: mesial 0.39 \(\pm\) 1.19 mm and distal 0.42 \(\pm\) 0.90 mm [25]. [PERSON] and [PERSON], using a different demineralization procedure, have achieved similar results in terms of quality and the amount of newly formed bone tissue [26; 27]. In a recent literature review, the conclusions were: autogenous teeth have superior clinical performance when compared with other grafts. In 2022, a histological and histomorphometric study showed the different outcomes of tooth-derived materials used as bone substitute in ASP [19]. The present study showed a high global bone volume in both groups evaluated. Moreover, significant differences  
Figure 3: The superimposition of these two CBCT sections allows seeing the regeneration was 0.81 mm greater than expected. were detected in vertical bone variation percentage in GB (102 mean value) compared to GA (89 mean value), as well as in horizontal bone variation, which was higher in GB (100% mean vale) compared to GA (92 mean value). The similar histomorphometrical results of the global residual graft in GA (5.24 \(\pm\) 5.82%) compared to GB (5.29 \(\pm\) 4.83%), observed in all specimens analyzed, suggested the hypothesis that the biomaterials seem to be extremely bio-compatible to the patient bone, promoting high value of bone regeneration. Furthermore, the present study showed very promising histomorphometrical results with higher NB (62.78) and VB (57.53) percentage mean values in GA compared to GB (NB 48.08-VB 42.41). In GA, on the bone surface it is possible to observe 1-2 mm where the residual granules are the majority of the volume, and the new bone is reduced, probably influencing the buccal plate elevated resorption. In Group B (control group), the residual graft is scattered in all the total histological core.