Failures and complications associated with resorbable and non-resorbable membranes in guided bone regeneration: A
D-S Cousiño1, S Egido-Moreno, B-G Navarro
1Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences (Dentistry) University of Barcelona, Bellvitge University Campus Government Pavilion. Office 2-29. C/Feixa Llarga, s/n 08907, Barcelona, Spain 18575jll@gmail.com.
Background:
Patients treated with guided bone regeneration (GBR) may be treated using resorbable or non- resorbable membranes, which differ in their efficacy, failures and complication profiles. The objective is to evaluate the efficacy and failures and complications of resorbable membranes versus non-resorbable membranes in patients undergoing guided bone regeneration (GBR). A search was conducted until July 31, 2025. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing both types of membrane in ROG were the eligibility criteria.
Material And Methods:
Data collection and risk of bias assessment (RoB 2.0) were performed. Primary endpoints included bone regeneration efficacy and membrane-associated complications.
Results:
Twenty-five RCTs with a total of 684 patients were included. Most studies reported a high success rate for both types of membranes. However, non-resorbable membranes had a higher incidence of complications, such as membrane exposure (up to 71%), disinheritance and infections.
Conclusions:
Both types of membranes are effective for ROG, they should be chosen according to the defect and type of patient. Resorbable membranes have a lower complication rate and non-resorbable membranes offer greater dimensional stability and the need to perform a second surgery for its removal.
