Jung Ji-Young, Park Seung-Hyun, Kim Kwan-Jung, Ko Kyung-A, Lee Dong-Woon, Lee Jung-Seok
Department of Periodontology, Research Institute for Periodontal Regeneration, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University, Seoul, South Korea.
Department of Periodontology, Dental Hospital, Veterans Health Service Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2025 Jul;36(7):879-889. doi: 10.1111/clr.14433. Epub 2025 Mar 24.
To compare the dimensional outcomes of horizontal augmentation with the retentive-flap technique using particulate and cross-linked collagenated bone substitutes.
This two-centre, two-arm randomized clinical trial investigated 69 subjects: 34 in the particulate group and 35 in the collagenated group. Patients were randomly assigned to receive single implant placement with simultaneous guided bone regeneration (GBR) using either particulate deproteinized porcine bone material (DPBM) or cross-linked collagenated DPBM. Quantitative evaluations were conducted for horizontal width, augmented area, and augmented volume in both hard and soft tissue dimensions.
Immediately after surgery, the collagenated group exhibited higher hard tissue dimensions in terms of horizontal width and augmented area. After 4 months, the difference between the two groups decreased to a non-significant level, mainly attributable to the high shrinkage rate of the collagenated group (32.32 [20.79] %) compared to the particulate group (19.90 [14.33] %). No significant difference was observed regarding the soft tissue contour analyses between the two groups after 4 months.
There were no significant differences between cross-linked collagenated and particulated DPBMs regarding the dimensional outcomes of horizontal augmentation with the retentive-flap technique. The high resorption rate of the collagenated bone substitute negates its initial superiority in both radiographic and soft tissue dimensions (no. KCT0005348).
比较使用颗粒状和交联胶原骨替代物的保留瓣技术进行水平骨增量后的尺寸结果。
这项双中心、双臂随机临床试验纳入了69名受试者:颗粒组34名,胶原组35名。患者被随机分配接受单颗种植体植入并同时使用颗粒状脱蛋白猪骨材料(DPBM)或交联胶原DPBM进行引导骨再生(GBR)。对硬组织和软组织维度的水平宽度、骨增量面积和骨增量体积进行了定量评估。
术后即刻,胶原组在水平宽度和骨增量面积方面的硬组织维度更高。4个月后,两组之间的差异降至无统计学意义水平,这主要归因于胶原组(32.32 [20.79] %)相比于颗粒组(19.90 [14.33] %)的高收缩率。4个月后,两组之间的软组织轮廓分析未观察到显著差异。
在使用保留瓣技术进行水平骨增量的尺寸结果方面,交联胶原DPBM和颗粒状DPBM之间没有显著差异。胶原骨替代物的高吸收率抵消了其在影像学和软组织维度上最初的优势(注册号KCT0005348)。