Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2017 Oct;19(5):821-832.
doi: 10.1111/cid.12520. Epub 2017 Jul 26.

Evaluation of complication rates and vertical bone gain after guided bone regeneration with non-resorbable membranes versus titanium meshes and resorbable membranes. A randomized clinical trial

Alessandro Cucchi  1 , Elisabetta Vignudelli  1 , Aldo Napolitano  1 , Claudio Marchetti  1 , Giuseppe Corinaldesi  1
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Evaluation of complication rates and vertical bone gain after guided bone regeneration with non-resorbable membranes versus titanium meshes and resorbable membranes. A randomized clinical trial

Alessandro Cucchi et al. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2017 Oct.

Abstract

Background: The partial edentulous posterior mandible is often a challenge area that requires a bone reconstructive surgery for implants placement.

Purpose: This RCT was aimed to evaluate complications rate and vertical bone gain after Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR) with dense non-resorbable d-PTFE titanium-reinforced membranes (Group A) versus titanium meshes covered by cross-linked collagen membranes (Group B).

Material and methods: 40 partially edentulous patients with atrophic posterior mandible, were randomly divided into two study group: 20 patients were treated with one stage GBR by means of non-resorbable d-PTFE titanium-reinforced membranes (Group A); and 20 patients, by means of titanium mesh covered by cross-linked collagen membranes (Group B). All complications were recorded, distinguishing between "surgical" and "healing" and between "minor" or "major.". Primary implants stability and vertical bone gain were also evaluated.

Results: In the group A, surgical and healing complication rates were 5.0% and 15.0%, respectively. In the group B, surgical and healing complication rates were 15.8% and 21.1%, respectively. No significant differences between two study group were observed regarding complications rate implant stability and vertical bone gain.

Conclusions: Both GBR approaches for the restoration of atrophic posterior mandible achieved similar results regarding complications, vertical bone gain and implant stability.

Keywords: alveolar ridge reconstruction; atrophy; bone augmentation; bone defects; bone regeneration; edentulous mandible; guided bone regeneration.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Preoperative clinical view
Figure 2
Figure 2
Preoperative peri‐apical x‐rays
Figure 3
Figure 3
Cortical perforations and implants insertion
Figure 4
Figure 4
D‐PTFE membrane fixation and bone grafting with autogenous bone and bone allograft
Figure 5
Figure 5
Clinical healing at 9 months
Figure 6
Figure 6
D‐PTFE membrane after 9 months
Figure 7
Figure 7
D‐PTFE membrane removal at the reopening surgery
Figure 8
Figure 8
Three‐dimensional bone regeneration around implants occlusal view
Figure 9
Figure 9
Peri‐apical x‐rays after healing screws placement
Figure 10
Figure 10
Peri‐apical x‐rays after definitive restoration
Figure 11
Figure 11
Preoperative clinical view
Figure 12
Figure 12
Preoperative peri‐apical x‐rays
Figure 13
Figure 13
Cortical perforations and implants insertion
Figure 14
Figure 14
Ti‐mesh fixation and bone grafting with autogenous bone and bone allograft
Figure 15
Figure 15
Application of collagen membrane over the Ti‐mesh
Figure 16
Figure 16
Clinical healing 9 months after surgery
Figure 17
Figure 17
Ti‐Mesh removal at the re‐opening surgery
Figure 18
Figure 18
Three‐dimensional bone regeneration around implants
Figure 19
Figure 19
Peri‐apical x‐rays after healing screws placement
Figure 20
Figure 20
Peri‐apical x‐rays after definitive restoration
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Atwood DA. Reduction of residual ridges: a major oral disease entità. J Prosthet Dent. 1971;26:266–279. - PubMed
    1. Atwood DA. Bone loss of edentulous alveolar ridges. J Periodontol. 1979;50:11–21. - PubMed
    1. Misch CE, Judy KW. Classification of partially edentulous arches for implant dentistry. Int J Oral Implantol. 1987;4:7–12. - PubMed
    1. Cawood J, Howell RA. classification of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1988;17:232–236. - PubMed
    1. Rocchietta I, Fontana F, Simion M. Clinical outcomes of vertical bone augmentation to enable dental implant placement: a systematic review. J Clin Periodontol. 2008;35:203–215. - PubMed

Publication types