Hard and soft tissue changes after guided bone regeneration using two different barrier membranes: an experimental in vivo investigation.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the contour and volumetric changes of hard and soft tissues after guided bone regeneration (GBR) using two types of barrier membranes together with a xenogeneic bone substitute in dehiscence-type defects around dental implants.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In 8 Beagle dogs, after tooth extraction, two-wall chronified bone defects were developed. Then, implants were placed with a buccal dehiscence defect that was treated with GBR using randomly: (i) deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) covered by a synthetic polylactic membrane (test group), (ii) DBBM plus a porcine natural collagen membrane (positive control) and (iii) defect only covered by the synthetic membrane (negative control group). Outcomes were evaluated at 4 and 12 weeks. Micro-CT was used to evaluate the hard tissue volumetric changes and STL files from digitized cast models were used to measure the soft tissues contour linear changes.

RESULTS

Test and positive control groups were superior in terms of volume gain and contour changes when compared with the negative control. Soft tissue changes showed at 4 weeks statistically significant superiority for test and positive control groups compared with negative control. After 12 weeks, the results were superior for test and positive control groups but not statistically significant, although, with a lesser magnitude, the negative control group exhibited gains in both, soft and hard tissues.

CONCLUSIONS

Both types of membranes (collagen and synthetic) attained similar outcomes, in terms of hard tissue volume gain and soft tissue contours when used in combination with DBBM CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Synthetic membranes were a valid alternative to the "gold standard" natural collagen membrane for treating dehiscence-type defects around dental implants when used with a xenogeneic bone substitute scaffold.