-
All Events
IAO-EAO-SIdP joint meeting 2024EAO-DGI joint meeting 202329th Annual Scientific CongressEAO Digital Days 2021EAO Digital Days 202028th Annual Scientific Congress27th Annual Scientific Congress26th Annual Scientific Congress25th Annual Scientific Congress24th Annual Scientific Congress23rd Annual Scientific Congress -
All Content TypesAbstractArticle ReviewePosterLearning moduleLearning QuizMatching SlidePDF DocumentWebcast
-
Sort ByRelevance
Background
The bone guided regeneration (GBR) is a highly predictable technique which consists when combined with simultaneous implant placement on cover the exposed threads of the implant with an osteconductive graft material.Following the GBR principles, a membrane must be used to avoid soft tissue encapsulation of the graft used, due to the increased rapidity of the fibroblasts compared to the osteoblasts.
Aims
The objective of the study is to value the volume stability of the augmented bone on the buccal side of the implant using a xenograft (Bio-oss®) and a membrane (Bio-Guide®) simultaneous after at least 12 months of healing.The obtained outcomes are compared to implants placed in native bone with no need of GBR.
Methods
To realize this Randomized Perspective Clinical Trials, 26 implants (Straumann Bone Level SLA surface®) were placed in the aesthetic zone of the maxilla. All the implants were placed with mesial and distal adjacent tooth and 2 staged surgery was performed achieving primary wound closure.The whole Sample was splitted in 2 groups:Control Group (C): sufficient alveolar crest width and height to allow implant placement without GBR.Test Group (T): alveolar crest with NO enough width but adequate height to perform implant placement without GBR.Cone beam computer tomography (CBCT) images were selected to be the most trustful methods for the aim of the study. CBCT were taken at:CBCT 1ST : Previous to the surgery. Diagnostic ExplorationCBCT 2ND : Immediately after the surgeryCBCT 3RD : At least 12 months after the surgery
Results
26 patients were included in the study. Actually we dispose up to 24 months follow up. The implants survival rates is 100% in both group. In T-group considering partial results (8 implants) we obtained the following results: • minimum bone final augmentation 2 mm• maximum bone final augmentation 3,2 mm• mean bone augmentation 2.55• standard deviation 0,407For the C-group the results will be obtained in the next 10 months.
Conclusions
Considering the sample of the present perspective RCT, we are collecting high results in implant success and survival rate in both groups. In compromised situation when there is not enough bone available, GBR performed with xenograft and reabsorbable membrane should be considered.
Background
The bone guided regeneration (GBR) is a highly predictable technique which consists when combined with simultaneous implant placement on cover the exposed threads of the implant with an osteconductive graft material.Following the GBR principles, a membrane must be used to avoid soft tissue encapsulation of the graft used, due to the increased rapidity of the fibroblasts compared to the osteoblasts.
Aims
The objective of the study is to value the volume stability of the augmented bone on the buccal side of the implant using a xenograft (Bio-oss®) and a membrane (Bio-Guide®) simultaneous after at least 12 months of healing.The obtained outcomes are compared to implants placed in native bone with no need of GBR.
Methods
To realize this Randomized Perspective Clinical Trials, 26 implants (Straumann Bone Level SLA surface®) were placed in the aesthetic zone of the maxilla. All the implants were placed with mesial and distal adjacent tooth and 2 staged surgery was performed achieving primary wound closure.The whole Sample was splitted in 2 groups:Control Group (C): sufficient alveolar crest width and height to allow implant placement without GBR.Test Group (T): alveolar crest with NO enough width but adequate height to perform implant placement without GBR.Cone beam computer tomography (CBCT) images were selected to be the most trustful methods for the aim of the study. CBCT were taken at:CBCT 1ST : Previous to the surgery. Diagnostic ExplorationCBCT 2ND : Immediately after the surgeryCBCT 3RD : At least 12 months after the surgery
Results
26 patients were included in the study. Actually we dispose up to 24 months follow up. The implants survival rates is 100% in both group. In T-group considering partial results (8 implants) we obtained the following results: • minimum bone final augmentation 2 mm• maximum bone final augmentation 3,2 mm• mean bone augmentation 2.55• standard deviation 0,407For the C-group the results will be obtained in the next 10 months.
Conclusions
Considering the sample of the present perspective RCT, we are collecting high results in implant success and survival rate in both groups. In compromised situation when there is not enough bone available, GBR performed with xenograft and reabsorbable membrane should be considered.
Background
The bone guided regeneration (GBR) is a highly predictable technique which consists when combined with simultaneous implant placement on cover the exposed threads of the implant with an osteconductive graft material.Following the GBR principles, a membrane must be used to avoid soft tissue encapsulation of the graft used, due to the increased rapidity of the fibroblasts compared to the osteoblasts.
Aims
The objective of the study is to value the volume stability of the augmented bone on the buccal side of the implant using a xenograft (Bio-oss®) and a membrane (Bio-Guide®) simultaneous after at least 12 months of healing.The obtained outcomes are compared to implants placed in native bone with no need of GBR.
Methods
To realize this Randomized Perspective Clinical Trials, 26 implants (Straumann Bone Level SLA surface®) were placed in the aesthetic zone of the maxilla. All the implants were placed with mesial and distal adjacent tooth and 2 staged surgery was performed achieving primary wound closure.The whole Sample was splitted in 2 groups:Control Group (C): sufficient alveolar crest width and height to allow implant placement without GBR.Test Group (T): alveolar crest with NO enough width but adequate height to perform implant placement without GBR.Cone beam computer tomography (CBCT) images were selected to be the most trustful methods for the aim of the study. CBCT were taken at:CBCT 1ST : Previous to the surgery. Diagnostic ExplorationCBCT 2ND : Immediately after the surgeryCBCT 3RD : At least 12 months after the surgery
Results
26 patients were included in the study. Actually we dispose up to 24 months follow up. The implants survival rates is 100% in both group. In T-group considering partial results (8 implants) we obtained the following results: • minimum bone final augmentation 2 mm• maximum bone final augmentation 3,2 mm• mean bone augmentation 2.55• standard deviation 0,407For the C-group the results will be obtained in the next 10 months.
Conclusions
Considering the sample of the present perspective RCT, we are collecting high results in implant success and survival rate in both groups. In compromised situation when there is not enough bone available, GBR performed with xenograft and reabsorbable membrane should be considered.
Background
The bone guided regeneration (GBR) is a highly predictable technique which consists when combined with simultaneous implant placement on cover the exposed threads of the implant with an osteconductive graft material.Following the GBR principles, a membrane must be used to avoid soft tissue encapsulation of the graft used, due to the increased rapidity of the fibroblasts compared to the osteoblasts.
Aims
The objective of the study is to value the volume stability of the augmented bone on the buccal side of the implant using a xenograft (Bio-oss®) and a membrane (Bio-Guide®) simultaneous after at least 12 months of healing.The obtained outcomes are compared to implants placed in native bone with no need of GBR.
Methods
To realize this Randomized Perspective Clinical Trials, 26 implants (Straumann Bone Level SLA surface®) were placed in the aesthetic zone of the maxilla. All the implants were placed with mesial and distal adjacent tooth and 2 staged surgery was performed achieving primary wound closure.The whole Sample was splitted in 2 groups:Control Group (C): sufficient alveolar crest width and height to allow implant placement without GBR.Test Group (T): alveolar crest with NO enough width but adequate height to perform implant placement without GBR.Cone beam computer tomography (CBCT) images were selected to be the most trustful methods for the aim of the study. CBCT were taken at:CBCT 1ST : Previous to the surgery. Diagnostic ExplorationCBCT 2ND : Immediately after the surgeryCBCT 3RD : At least 12 months after the surgery
Results
26 patients were included in the study. Actually we dispose up to 24 months follow up. The implants survival rates is 100% in both group. In T-group considering partial results (8 implants) we obtained the following results: • minimum bone final augmentation 2 mm• maximum bone final augmentation 3,2 mm• mean bone augmentation 2.55• standard deviation 0,407For the C-group the results will be obtained in the next 10 months.
Conclusions
Considering the sample of the present perspective RCT, we are collecting high results in implant success and survival rate in both groups. In compromised situation when there is not enough bone available, GBR performed with xenograft and reabsorbable membrane should be considered.