Guided bone regeneration using two types of non-resorbable barrier membranes.
10.5125/jkaoms.2010.36.4.275
- Author:
Ji Young LEE
1
;
Young Kyun KIM
;
Pil Young YUN
;
Ji Su OH
;
Su Gwan KIM
Author Information
1. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea. sgckim@chosun.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Guided bone regeneration (GBR);
Expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (e-PTFE);
High-density polytetrafluoroethylene (d-PTFE);
Non-resorbable barrier membrane
- MeSH:
Bone Regeneration;
Bone Resorption;
Follow-Up Studies;
Humans;
Membranes;
Polytetrafluoroethylene;
Prostheses and Implants;
Survival Rate
- From:Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons
2010;36(4):275-279
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
INTRODUCTION: Guided bone regeneration (GBR) is a common procedure for the treatment of bone defects and bone augmentation. The non-resorbable barriers are well-documented barriers for GBR because of their stability and malleability. However, few GBR studies have focused on the different types of non-resorbable barriers. Therefore, this study examined the clinical results of different non-resorbable barriers for GBR; expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (e-PTFE) (TR-Gore Tex, Flagstaff, AZ, USA), and high-density polytetrafluoroethylene (d-PTFE) (Cytoplast membrane, Oraltronics, Bremen, Germany). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The analysis was performed on patients treated with GBR and implant placement from January 2007 to October 2007 in the department of the Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. The patients were divided into two groups based on the type of non-resorbable barrier used, and the amount of bone regeneration, marginal bone resorption after prosthetics, implant survival rate and surgical complication in both groups were evaluated. RESULTS: The implants in both groups showed high survival rates, and the implant-supported prostheses functioned stably during the follow-up period. During the second surgery of the implant, all horizontal defects were filled with new bone, and there was no significant difference in the amount of vertical bone defect. CONCLUSION: In bone defect areas, GBR with non-resorbable barriers can produce favorable results with adequate postoperative management. There was no significant difference in bone regeneration between e-PTFE and d-PTFE.
