Particulate Versus Cross-Linked Collagenated Bone Substitutes for Guided Bone Regeneration: A Randomized Controlled...

Area of Science:

• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Periodontology
• Regenerative Dentistry

Background:

• Guided bone regeneration (GBR) is crucial for dental implant success.
• Bone substitutes are essential for GBR procedures.
• Comparing different bone graft materials is vital for optimizing outcomes.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare dimensional outcomes of horizontal bone augmentation using particulate and cross-linked collagenated bone substitutes.
• To evaluate the efficacy of the retentive-flap technique in conjunction with these materials.

Main Methods:

• A two-center, randomized clinical trial involving 69 subjects.
• Subjects received simultaneous implant placement and GBR with either particulate deproteinized porcine bone material (DPBM) or cross-linked collagenated DPBM.
• Quantitative evaluations of horizontal width, augmented area, and volume were performed.

Main Results:

• The collagenated group initially showed greater hard tissue dimensions (width and area).
• After 4 months, shrinkage in the collagenated group (32.32%) led to non-significant differences compared to the particulate group (19.90%).
• No significant differences in soft tissue contour were observed between groups after 4 months.

Conclusions:

• No significant dimensional outcome differences were found between cross-linked collagenated and particulated DPBMs with the retentive-flap technique.
• The high resorption rate of the collagenated substitute diminished its initial advantages.
• Clinical decisions should consider the resorption characteristics of bone substitutes.