BackgroundThe partial edentulous posterior mandible is often a challenge area that requires a bone reconstructive surgery for implants placement.PurposeThis RCT was aimed to evaluate complications rate and vertical bone gain after Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR) with dense non‐resorbable d‐PTFE titanium‐reinforced membranes (Group A) versus titanium meshes covered by cross‐linked collagen membranes (Group B).Material and Methods40 partially edentulous patients with atrophic posterior mandible, were randomly divided into two study group: 20 patients were treated with one stage GBR by means of non‐resorbable d‐PTFE titanium‐reinforced membranes (Group A); and 20 patients, by means of titanium mesh covered by cross‐linked collagen membranes (Group B). All complications were recorded, distinguishing between “surgical” and “healing” and between “minor” or “major.”. Primary implants stability and vertical bone gain were also evaluated.ResultsIn the group A, surgical and healing complication rates were 5.0% and 15.0%, respectively. In the group B, surgical and healing complication rates were 15.8% and 21.1%, respectively. No significant differences between two study group were observed regarding complications rate implant stability and vertical bone gain.ConclusionsBoth GBR approaches for the restoration of atrophic posterior mandible achieved similar results regarding complications, vertical bone gain and implant stability.

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creat ive Commo ns Attri bution-NonCo mmercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.

Background One of the most recent innovations in bone augmentation surgery is represented by computer-aided-design/computer-aided-manufacturing (CAD/CAM) customized titanium meshes, which can be used to restore vertical bone defects before implant-prosthetic rehabilitations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness/reliability of this technique in a consecutive series of cases. Methods Ten patients in need of bone augmentation before implant therapy were treated using CAD/CAM customized titanium meshes. A digital workflow was adopted to design virtual meshes on 3D bone models. Then, Direct Metal Laser Sintering (DMLS) technology was used to produce the titanium meshes, and vertical ridge augmentation was performed according to an established surgical protocol. Surgical complications, healing complications, vertical bone gain (VBG), planned bone volume (PBV), lacking bone volume (LBV), regenerated bone volume (RBV), average regeneration rate (RR) and implant success rate were evaluated. Results All augmented sites were successfully restored with definitive implant-supported fixed partial dentures. Measurements showed an average VBG of 4.5 ± 1.8 mm at surgical re-entry. Surgical and healing complications occurred in 30% and 10% of cases, respectively. Mean values of PBV, LBV, and RBV were 984, 92, and 892 mm 3 , respectively. The average RR achieved was 89%. All 26 implants were successfully in function after 1 year of follow-up. Conclusions The results of this study suggest that the bone augmentation by means of DMLS custom-made titanium meshes can be considered a reliable and effective technique in restoring vertical bone defects.

No abstract

Background: Guided bone regeneration (GBR) allows to achieve vertical ridge augmentation whether with nonresorbable membranes or resorbable membranes with Ti-mesh, but till now no studies are published comparing histological and histomorphometrical outcomes of these two procedures.Materials and Methods: Forty partially edentulous patients required vertical bone regeneration to place implants in the posterior mandible: 20 patients were randomly assigned to group A (Ti-PTFE); while 20 patients to group B (Collagen plus Ti-mesh).For both groups, graft material was a 50:50 mixture of autogenous bone and bone allograft. After 9 months, tissue biopsies were taken from augmented sites (regenerated bone ROI-1; native bone ROI-2) and undergone to histological and histomorphometric analysis. Percentages of bone tissue (B.Ar), biomaterial (Mat. Ar), and soft tissue (St.Ar) were measured; measurements of perimeters were calculated too. ROI-1 values were also compared to ROI-2 in both groups.Results: Twenty-five samples were collected and analyzed consecutively: 13 in group A and 12 in group B. The mean B.Ar, Mat.Ar, and St.Ar were 39. 7%, 8.6%, and 52.1% in group A; similar results were obtained in group B, with mean values of 42.1%, 9.6%, and 48.3%, respectively. No significant statistically differences were observed.Differences were observed between ROI-1 and ROI-2 in both group. Finally, bone structure index of ROI-1 and ROI-2 showed statistical differences. Conclusions:The preliminary results of this study suggest that GBR using nonresorbable membranes and Ti-mesh with resorbable membranes in combination with autogenous bone and bone allograft provide similar histological and histomorphometric results. K E Y W O R D Sbone augmentation, bone defects, histological analysis