OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to evaluate the effect of bone graft materials and collagen membranes in ridge splitting procedures with immediate implant placement using a dog model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mandibular premolars were extracted in five beagle dogs. After 3 months, ridge splitting and placement of three OsseoSpeed implants were performed bilaterally. The gaps between the implants were allocated according to the following eight treatment modalities; Group 1(no graft), Group 2 (autogenous bone), Group 3 (Bio-Oss Collagen), Group 4 (Bio-Oss), Group 5 (no graft+BioGide), Group 6 (autogenous bone+BioGide), Group 7 (Bio-Oss Collagen+BioGide), and Group 8 (Bio-Oss +BioGide). The dogs were sacrificed after 8 or 12 weeks and the specimens were analyzed histologically and histometrically. RESULTS: The gaps between the implants were filled with the newly formed bone, irrespective of which of the eight grafting techniques was used. Group 1 revealed a significantly lower percentage of bone-to-implant contact (BIC) than Group 5 at 8 and 12 weeks (P<0.05). Group 1 showed the most prominent marginal bone loss (MBL) at 12 weeks (P<0.05). Regarding the use of membranes, Groups 1 and 2 showed significantly more MBL than Groups 5 and 6 at 12 weeks (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: After ridge splitting, if the gaps between implants were grafted or covered with collagen membranes, a higher percentage of BIC was obtained. Based on our results, we suggest that the use of bone graft materials and/or collagen membranes is better for the prevention of MBL after ridge splitting procedures.
OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to evaluate the effect of bone graft materials and collagen membranes in ridge splitting procedures with immediate implant placement using a dog model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mandibular premolars were extracted in five beagle dogs. After 3 months, ridge splitting and placement of three OsseoSpeed implants were performed bilaterally. The gaps between the implants were allocated according to the following eight treatment modalities; Group 1(no graft), Group 2 (autogenous bone), Group 3 (Bio-Oss Collagen), Group 4 (Bio-Oss), Group 5 (no graft+BioGide), Group 6 (autogenous bone+BioGide), Group 7 (Bio-Oss Collagen+BioGide), and Group 8 (Bio-Oss +BioGide). The dogs were sacrificed after 8 or 12 weeks and the specimens were analyzed histologically and histometrically. RESULTS: The gaps between the implants were filled with the newly formed bone, irrespective of which of the eight grafting techniques was used. Group 1 revealed a significantly lower percentage of bone-to-implant contact (BIC) than Group 5 at 8 and 12 weeks (P<0.05). Group 1 showed the most prominent marginal bone loss (MBL) at 12 weeks (P<0.05). Regarding the use of membranes, Groups 1 and 2 showed significantly more MBL than Groups 5 and 6 at 12 weeks (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: After ridge splitting, if the gaps between implants were grafted or covered with collagen membranes, a higher percentage of BIC was obtained. Based on our results, we suggest that the use of bone graft materials and/or collagen membranes is better for the prevention of MBL after ridge splitting procedures.
Authors: Andres Stricker; Daniel Widmer; Boyko Gueorguiev; Dieter Wahl; Peter Varga; Fabian Duttenhoefer Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2018-10-14 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Fabian Duttenhoefer; Peter Varga; Dominik Jenni; Leonard Grünwald; Luisa Thiemann; Boyko Gueorguiev; Andres Stricker Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2020-11-19 Impact factor: 3.411