Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 15, 2026

Biological Compatibility Profile on Biomaterials for Bone Regeneration
Published on: November 16, 2018
A clinical and histological comparison of two different bone augmentation materials in the atrophic pre-maxilla
Maria Hernandez1, Gregory A Pette, Andre Grenier
1Section of Periodontology, Nova Southeastern University College of Dental Medicine, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, USA.
Abstract:
This case study was conducted to compare the regenerative potential of bovine xenograft versus demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft in a thermoplastic biologic carrier in regards to achieving regeneration of bone width as well as potential bone height. The objective for the patient was to gain adequate bone volume for the placement of dental implants using the two different forms of graft material--one with a slow resorption time and the other in a gelatin matrix to provide dimensional stability. The results of this case report are inconclusive to demonstrate the superiority of one of the two graft materials over the other in reconstructing a severely atrophied maxilla. Both sites ultimately required a second guided bone regeneration (GBR) procedure prior to implant placement. It was speculated that adequate space maintenance might not have been achieved during the initial procedures.
