Absorbable versus nonabsorbable membranes
Absorbable versus nonabsorbable membranes and bone grafts in the treatment of ligature-induced peri-implantitis defects in dogs. Part I. A clinical investigation.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2001 Apr;12(2):115-20.
Nociti FH Jr, Machado MA, Stefani CM, Sallum EA, Sallum AW.Dental School of Piracicaba, University of Campinas, Department of Periodontics-Piracicaba, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
The purpose of this study was to clinically evaluate an absorbable collagen membrane (Bio-Gide) and a nonabsorbable polytetrafluoroethylene membrane (PTFE), associated or not with bone grafts, for the treatment of ligature-induced peri-implantitis defects in dogs. The bilateral mandibular premolars were removed from 5 2-year-old mongrel dogs. After 3 months of healing, 3 titanium implants were placed on each side of the mandible. Experimental peri-implantitis was induced after abutment connection. Ligatures and abutments were removed after 1 month and the bone defects were randomly assigned to one of the following treatments: DB: debridement alone; GBR+BG-I: debridement plus PTFE membrane associated with mineralized bone graft (Bio-Oss); GBR+BG-II: debridement plus collagen membrane (Bio-Gide) associated with mineralized bone graft; GBR-I: debridement plus PTFE membrane; GBR-II: debridement plus collagen membrane; BG: debridement plus mineralized bone graft. The peri-implant bone defects were measured before and 5 months after treatment. Results showed the greatest percentage of vertical bone fill for GBR+BG-II (27.77+/-14.07) followed by GBR-II (21.78+/-16.19), BG (21.26+/-6.87), GBR+BG-I (19.57+/-13.36), GBR-I (18.86+/-10.63) and DB (14.03+/-5.6). However, the values were not statistically significant (ANOVA, contrast F test, P=0.612). Within the limits of the present investigation, it can be concluded that no difference was detected among treatments.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2001 Apr;12(2):115-20.
Nociti FH Jr, Machado MA, Stefani CM, Sallum EA, Sallum AW.Dental School of Piracicaba, University of Campinas, Department of Periodontics-Piracicaba, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
The purpose of this study was to clinically evaluate an absorbable collagen membrane (Bio-Gide) and a nonabsorbable polytetrafluoroethylene membrane (PTFE), associated or not with bone grafts, for the treatment of ligature-induced peri-implantitis defects in dogs. The bilateral mandibular premolars were removed from 5 2-year-old mongrel dogs. After 3 months of healing, 3 titanium implants were placed on each side of the mandible. Experimental peri-implantitis was induced after abutment connection. Ligatures and abutments were removed after 1 month and the bone defects were randomly assigned to one of the following treatments: DB: debridement alone; GBR+BG-I: debridement plus PTFE membrane associated with mineralized bone graft (Bio-Oss); GBR+BG-II: debridement plus collagen membrane (Bio-Gide) associated with mineralized bone graft; GBR-I: debridement plus PTFE membrane; GBR-II: debridement plus collagen membrane; BG: debridement plus mineralized bone graft. The peri-implant bone defects were measured before and 5 months after treatment. Results showed the greatest percentage of vertical bone fill for GBR+BG-II (27.77+/-14.07) followed by GBR-II (21.78+/-16.19), BG (21.26+/-6.87), GBR+BG-I (19.57+/-13.36), GBR-I (18.86+/-10.63) and DB (14.03+/-5.6). However, the values were not statistically significant (ANOVA, contrast F test, P=0.612). Within the limits of the present investigation, it can be concluded that no difference was detected among treatments.
posted by Ajou Huang | 7:19 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home