Bovine‐derived xenograft in combination with autogenous bone chips versus xenograft alone for the augmentation of bony dehiscences around oral implants: A randomized, controlled, split‐mouth clinical trial

Abstract

The aim of the study was to evaluate whether the use of a xenograft is not inferior to the use of xenograft and autogenous bone chips in treating dehiscences at implant placement. Materials and Methods: After implant placement, leaving a dehiscence, control sites were treated using a composite graft (autogenous bone chips and xenograft) and at the test sites 100% xenograft was used. Both sites were covered with a resorbable collagen membrane. Dehiscences were measured clinically at implant placement and at re-entry. CBCT was taken immediately after implant placement and after 4 months. Results: In total, 28 GBR procedures were performed in 14 patients. On average, the change in vertical defect height was 2.07 mm (46.7%-test group) and 2.28 mm (50.9%-control group) (p > .05). The horizontal defect width at the implant shoulder change on average 1.85 mm (40.5%-test group) and 1.75 mm (40.9%-control group) (p > .05). On average, a loss in augmentation thickness of 0.45 mm (68.9%-test group) and 0.64 mm (55.5% control group) between implant placement and augmentation and abutment surgery was obtained at the implant shoulder. Conclusion: Both treatment modalities seem to work to a certain extent. At implant shoulder level, the augmentation thickness seems to be disappeared after the healing phase. (NCT03946020).

Addition of autogenous bone chips to deproteinized bovine bone mineral does not have additional benefit in lateral ridge augmentation—A preclinical in vivo experimental study

“…This latter finding was corroborated by evidence from a recent randomized clinical trial showing that increasing the proportion of autogenous bone chips did not enhance histologic bone formation in a horizontal defect treated with GBR (Aludden et al., 2020). Similar clinical outcomes have been described for other randomized clinical trials, but these were associated with an increased risk of complications related to the donor sites (Patel et al., 2019; Temmerman et al., 2020).…”

Clinical comparison of different flap advancement techniques to periosteal releasing incision in guided bone regeneration: A randomized controlled trial

“…The use of Xenograft alone as the bone augmentation material has been controversial. However, it was recently documented that the addition of autogenous bone to a xenograft does not seem to influence the resolution of bony dehiscence defects 32 …”

Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Simultaneous Alveolar Ridge Augmentation by Means of Preformed Titanium Meshes at Dehiscence-Type Peri-Implant Defects: A Prospective Pilot Study

“…It is worth noting that, by contrast with the present investigation, the authors grafted the defects with DBBM alone. The question whether the use of DBBM is not inferior to the use of DBBM and autogenous bone chips for the treatment of bony dehiscences at implant placement has been addressed in a recent randomized controlled trial [21]. The results indicated that horizontal defect width changes at the implant shoulder did not differ significantly between the two groups.…”