Guided bone regeneration around endosseous implants with anorganic bovine bone mineral. A randomized controlled trial comparing bioabsorbable versus non-resorbable barriers

被引:136
作者
Carpio, L
Loza, J
Lynch, S
Genco, R
机构
[1] Harvard Univ, Sch Dent Med, Dept Periodontol, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[2] Harvard Univ, Sch Dent Med, Dept Restorat Dent, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[3] Biomimet Pharmaceut Inc, Setauket, NY USA
[4] Univ Buffalo, Sch Dent Med, Dept Oral Biol & Restorat Dent, Periodontal & Implant Res Ctr, Buffalo, NY USA
关键词
bone regeneration; osseointegration; collagen/therapeutic use; polytetrafluoroethylene/therapeutic use; dental implants; endosseous; grafts; bone; membranes; bioabsorbable; barrier;
D O I
10.1902/jop.2000.71.11.1743
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Background: Guided bone regeneration (GBR) is a viable treatment for osseous defects surrounding dental implants. Controversy exists regarding the choice of barrier membrane used and the method of membrane fixation to achieve GBR. Methods: This study compared the efficacy of a porcine-derived bioabsorbable collagen membrane and an expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) membrane (non-resorbable) for GBR using a bovine bone xenograft/autograft bone composite in defects surrounding dental implants. The study also examined the effect of primary barrier fixation on GBR. Defect size was recorded at Stage 1 and 2 surgeries (performed 6 months apart). Forty-eight subjects (41% males, 59% females) requiring GBR were treated with either collagen (23) or ePTFE (25) barriers, respectively. Implants were titanium self-tapping screw-type. In 34 GBR sites, barrier fixation was achieved with polylactic acid resorbable pins. The remaining barriers were secured with the implant cover screw and/or embedded beneath the flaps. Results: At 6 months, a decrease in defect width (collagen barrier 1.95 +/- 0.60 mm, ePTFE barrier 2.65 +/- 0.56 mm), length (collagen barrier 2.65 +/- 0.61 mm, ePTFE barrier 2.26 +/- 0.66 mm), and circumference (degrees) (collagen barrier 57.7 +/- 18.7, ePTFE barrier 80.2 +/- 19.9) was observed for both membranes. A significant number (chi (2), P = 0.041) of postoperative complications occurred when barrier fixation was lacking at initial surgery. Furthermore, a significant difference (P <0.05) in the success of GBR with respect to defect size was observed when barrier fixation was taken into account. Conclusions: In conclusion, both collagen and ePTFE barriers proved suitable for achieving GBR of osseous defects surrounding dental implants. The results of this study stress the importance of barrier fixation at the time of initial surgery.
引用
收藏
页码:1743 / 1749
页数:7
相关论文
共 22 条
[1]  
Avera SP, 1997, INT J ORAL MAX IMPL, V12, P88
[2]  
Becker W, 1995, Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, V10, P143
[3]  
Becker W, 1994, Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, V9, P31
[4]  
Becker W, 1994, INT J ORAL MAXILLOF, V9, P389
[5]   Healing around implants placed in bone defects treated with BiO-Oss(R) - An Experimental study in the dog [J].
Berglundh, T ;
Lindhe, J .
CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 1997, 8 (02) :117-124
[6]  
Cordioli G, 1999, INT J PERIODONT REST, V19, P45
[7]  
Dahlin C, 1989, Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, V4, P19
[8]   HEALING OF BONE DEFECTS BY GUIDED TISSUE REGENERATION [J].
DAHLIN, C ;
LINDE, A ;
GOTTLOW, J ;
NYMAN, S .
PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 1988, 81 (05) :672-676
[9]   Bone regeneration in extraction sites after immediate placement of an e-PTFE membrane with or without a biomaterial - A report on 12 consecutive cases [J].
Dies, F ;
Etienne, D ;
Abboud, NB ;
Ouhayoun, JP .
CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 1996, 7 (03) :277-285
[10]  
Greenstein G, 1993, PERIODONTOL 2000, V1, P36