Guided bone regeneration around dental implants in the atrophic alveolar ridge using a bioresorbable barrier. An experimental study in the monkey. |
| |
| Authors: | Markus B. Hü rzeler,Carlos R. Quiñ ones,Dietmar Hutmacher,Peter Schü pbach |
| |
| Affiliation: | Department of Prosthodontics, Albert‐Ludwigs University, Freiburg, Germany and Department of Stomatology, Division of Periodontology, Dental Branch, University of Texas‐Houston Health Science Center, Houston, TX, USA;;IberoAmerican Institute of Periodontology and Oral Implantology, San Juan, PR, USA and Department of Stomatology, Division of Periodontology, Dental Branch, University of Texas‐Houston Health Science Center, Houston, USA;;Department of Biomechanics' and Biomaterials, Polytechnic Offenburg. Germany;;Department of Oral Microbiology and General Immunology, Dental Institute, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland |
| |
| Abstract: | The aim of this study was to evaluate guided bone regeneration (GBR) around dental implants placed in atrophic alveolar ridges using an experimental, nonporous bioresorbable barrier. In 8 Rhesus monkeys, the maxillary canines and lateral incisors were extracted bilaterally and the remaining alveoli were reduced to create atrophic ridges. After a healing period of 3 months, soft tissue expansion was performed using a subperiosteal tissue expander. After 1 month of tissue expansion, an IMZ implant was placed in the atrophic ridge on each side in such a way that its coronal 4 mm to 5 mm remained circumferentially exposed above the bone level. The test implants were covered with a bioresorbable barrier made of poly (D,L‐lactid‐co‐tri‐methylencarbonate) in a 70/30 ratio, whereas the control implants were covered with a nonresorbable expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (e‐PTFE) barrier. The e‐FTFE barriers were stabilized with titanium minipins while the bioresorbable barriers were analogously fixed using bioresorbable minipins made of poly (L‐lactid‐co‐D,L‐lactid) 70/30. Clinical healing progressed uneventfully in both groups and no soft tissue dehiscences occurred. Histometric and histomorphometric analyses were performed 5 months post surgery. Both test and control implants exhibited direct bone‐to‐implant contact to variable extents. The mean direct mineralized bone‐to‐implant contact length fraction was 32% of the total implant length in the test sites and 58% in the control sites. Control sites exhibited significantly greater bone fill compared to the experimental sites ( P <0.00l). Histologic observations of test specimens demonstrated a moderate inflammatory reaction related to the degradation and resorption products of the barrier. In conclusion, the nonresorbable e FTFE GBR barrier was found to be superior to the bioresorbable barriers tested in the present investigation. |
| |
| Keywords: | guided bone regeneration bioresorbable barrier dental implants |
|
|
