Clinic of Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Material Science, Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Faculty of Odontology, Universidad Complutense of Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017 Nov;28(11):e262-e270. doi: 10.1111/clr.13011. Epub 2017 Apr 4.
To test whether an equine bone substitute block used for guided bone regeneration (GBR) of peri-implant defects differs from bovine block or particulate bone substitutes regarding the hard and soft tissue contours of the augmented ridge.
MATERIAL & METHODS: Two semi-saddle bone defects were prepared in each side of the mandible of eight dogs, and one titanium implant was inserted into every defect. The defects were randomly allocated to receive one of the following treatments: bone augmentation by GBR using (1) particulate deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) + a collagen membrane (CM), (2) block DBBM + CM, (3) equine bone substitute block + CM, and (4) empty controls. After 4 months, the jaws were scanned by means of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). CBCT analysis was performed in one central and two lateral (mesial and distal) regions of interest (ROI) of each site evaluating the horizontal thickness of the augmented hard tissue (HT ) and the total thickness of hard and soft tissue (HT ). The Wilcoxon-Pratt signed rank test was used for statistical analysis.
In the majority of ROIs, equine and bovine blocks rendered significantly higher values in HT and HT than controls (P < 0.05). Generally, equine blocks reached the highest values in HT and HT followed by DBBM blocks and particulate DBBM. The differences in HT and HT between GBR groups were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). In the central ROI, HT at the level of the implant shoulder measured 1.7 ± 1.4 mm for equine blocks, 1.7 ± 1.0 mm for DBBM blocks, 0.9 ± 1.2 mm for particulate DBBM, and 0 ± 0 mm for controls. The corresponding values in the lateral ROI reached 1.9 ± 1.1 mm for equine blocks, 1.2 ± 0.8 mm for DBBM blocks, 1.0 ± 0.9 mm for particulate DBBM, and 0 ± 0 mm for controls.
GBR with bone substitute blocks lead to higher ridge dimensions than empty controls. The equine block with CM rendered the most favorable outcomes in hard and soft tissue contours followed by DBBM block and DBBM granulate with CM.
检测在引导骨再生（GBR）中用于种植体周围缺损的马源性骨替代物与牛源性块状或颗粒状骨替代物在增强嵴的软硬组织轮廓方面是否存在差异。
在 8 只狗的下颌骨两侧各制备 2 个半鞍状骨缺损，每个缺损中植入 1 个钛植入物。将这些缺损随机分配接受以下治疗之一：（1）使用颗粒脱蛋白牛骨矿物质（DBBM）+胶原膜（CM）进行 GBR 骨增量，（2）块状 DBBM+CM，（3）马源性骨替代物块+CM，（4）空白对照。4 个月后，通过锥形束 CT（CBCT）对颌骨进行扫描。在每个部位的 1 个中央和 2 个侧位（近中和远中）感兴趣区（ROI）中进行 CBCT 分析，评估增强硬组织的水平厚度（HT）和硬组织与软组织的总厚度（HT）。采用 Wilcoxon-Pratt 符号秩检验进行统计学分析。
在大多数 ROI 中，马源性和牛源性块状物在 HT 和 HT 方面的测量值明显高于对照组（P<0.05）。通常，马源性块状物在 HT 和 HT 方面达到最高值，其次是 DBBM 块状物和颗粒状 DBBM。GBR 组之间在 HT 和 HT 方面的差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。在中央 ROI 中，马源性块状物在种植体肩水平处的 HT 为 1.7±1.4mm，DBBM 块状物为 1.7±1.0mm，颗粒状 DBBM 为 0.9±1.2mm，对照组为 0±0mm。在侧位 ROI 中，相应值分别为马源性块状物 1.9±1.1mm，DBBM 块状物 1.2±0.8mm，颗粒状 DBBM 为 1.0±0.9mm，对照组为 0±0mm。
使用骨替代物进行 GBR 可使嵴的尺寸高于空白对照组。CM 处理的马源性块状物在硬组织和软组织轮廓方面产生了最有利的结果，其次是 DBBM 块状物和 CM 处理的 DBBM 颗粒。
