1. Randomized controlled trial to compare two bone substitutes in the treatment of bony dehiscences
- Author
-
Nele, Van Assche, Sofie, Michels, Ignace, Naert, and Marc, Quirynen
- Subjects
Adult ,Male ,Alveolar Bone Loss ,Bone Matrix ,Dental Prosthesis Retention ,Absorbable Implants ,Alveolar Process ,Maxilla ,Humans ,Prospective Studies ,Autografts ,Aged ,Dental Implants ,Minerals ,Bone Transplantation ,Dental Implantation, Endosseous ,Dental Implant-Abutment Design ,Membranes, Artificial ,Middle Aged ,Radiography ,Treatment Outcome ,Bone Substitutes ,Guided Tissue Regeneration, Periodontal ,Female ,Hydroxyapatites ,Follow-Up Studies - Abstract
This in vivo split-mouth randomized controlled trial compared a synthetic bone substitute with a bovine bone mineral to cover bone dehiscences after implant insertion.Fourteen patients received four to six implants to support an overdenture. Two comparable dehiscences within the same patient were first covered with a layer of autogenous bone, followed by a layer of either Bio-Oss® (group 1; Geistlich Pharma AG, Wolhusen, Switzerland) or Straumann BoneCeramic® (group 2; Institut Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland) and sealed by a resorbable membrane. The change in vertical dimension of the defect was measured at implant placement and at abutment connection (6.5 months). Clinical and radiological parameters were evaluated up to 1 year of loading.The vertical size of the defect at surgery was 6.4 ± 1.6 mm for group 1 and 6.4 ± 2.2 mm for group 2 sites, measured from the implant shoulder. After 6.5 months, the depth of the defect was reduced to 1.5 ± 1.2 mm and 1.9 ± 1.2 mm for group 1 and group 2 sites, respectively (p0.05). No implants failed during follow-up. Mean marginal bone loss over the SLActive surface was 0.94 mm (group 1), 0.81 mm (group 2), and 0.93 mm (group 3, no dehiscence) after 1 year of loading.Both bone substitutes behaved equally effectively.
- Published
- 2012