Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 14, 2026
Half-segmental Diaphyseal Bone Defect Model in Rats for Evaluating Bone Substitute Performance in Load-bearing Regions
Published on: December 30, 2025
Effect of pseudo-periosteum on hard and soft tissue regeneration following lateral bone augmentation using a titanium
Seung-Hyun Park1, Kyeong-Won Paeng1, So-Ra Yoon2
1Department of Periodontology, Research Institute for Periodontal Regeneration, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea.
Purpose:
The aims of this study were 1) to evaluate the 16-week bone augmentation outcomes using a titanium mesh (TM), including an 8-week transmucosal healing period following TM removal, and 2) to investigate the impact of pseudo-periosteum formation on regenerative outcomes.
Methods:
Atrophic alveolar ridge defects were induced in 6 canine mandibles, and 5 peri-implant defects were created in each hemi-mandible. Bone augmentation was attempted using the following randomly allocated modalities: 1) Control: no treatment; 2) TM group: blood clot covered by TM; 3) TM + bone substitute (BS) group: synthetic BS covered by TM; 4) TM + collagen membrane (CM) group: blood clot covered by TM and CM; and 5) TM + BS + CM group: BS covered by TM and CM. TMs were removed after 8 weeks, followed by abutment connection and an additional 8-week healing period. After sacrifice, histomorphometric analyses of hard and soft tissues were conducted.
Results:
Regardless of early TM exposure (5/30), all implants achieved successful osseointegration and demonstrated comparable bone regeneration outcomes. No significant differences in horizontal or vertical bone gain were observed among the groups, whereas superiority of the TM + BS group over the control group showed a higher augmented bone percentage (P=0.021). The thickness of the pseudo-periosteum was not associated with hard or soft tissue regeneration outcomes.
Conclusions:
TM removal after 8 weeks did not significantly affect the histologic outcomes of lateral bone augmentation performed with simultaneous implant placement. The presence of a pseudo-periosteum did not adversely influence either hard or soft tissue regenerative outcomes.
