Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 25, 2026
Half-segmental Diaphyseal Bone Defect Model in Rats for Evaluating Bone Substitute Performance in Load-bearing Regions
Published on: December 30, 2025
Randomized controlled trial to compare two bone substitutes in the treatment of bony dehiscences
Nele Van Assche1, Sofie Michels, Ignace Naert
1Department of Periodontology, Faculty of Medicine, Catholic University Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Aim:
This in vivo split-mouth randomized controlled trial compared a synthetic bone substitute with a bovine bone mineral to cover bone dehiscences after implant insertion.
Materials And Methods:
Fourteen patients received four to six implants to support an overdenture. Two comparable dehiscences within the same patient were first covered with a layer of autogenous bone, followed by a layer of either Bio-Oss® (group 1; Geistlich Pharma AG, Wolhusen, Switzerland) or Straumann BoneCeramic® (group 2; Institut Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland) and sealed by a resorbable membrane. The change in vertical dimension of the defect was measured at implant placement and at abutment connection (6.5 months). Clinical and radiological parameters were evaluated up to 1 year of loading.
Results:
The vertical size of the defect at surgery was 6.4 ± 1.6 mm for group 1 and 6.4 ± 2.2 mm for group 2 sites, measured from the implant shoulder. After 6.5 months, the depth of the defect was reduced to 1.5 ± 1.2 mm and 1.9 ± 1.2 mm for group 1 and group 2 sites, respectively (p > 0.05). No implants failed during follow-up. Mean marginal bone loss over the SLActive surface was 0.94 mm (group 1), 0.81 mm (group 2), and 0.93 mm (group 3, no dehiscence) after 1 year of loading.
Conclusion:
Both bone substitutes behaved equally effectively.
