Yulan Wang, Gang Fu, Jian Zhang, Yan Xu, Ming Shen, Zhe Yi, Jing Lan, Qiang Li, Yangsheng Zhao, Runfa Wu, Yufeng Zhang
{"title":"Bioceramics for Guided Bone Regeneration: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Yulan Wang, Gang Fu, Jian Zhang, Yan Xu, Ming Shen, Zhe Yi, Jing Lan, Qiang Li, Yangsheng Zhao, Runfa Wu, Yufeng Zhang","doi":"10.1111/cid.13437","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare the clinical effectiveness of a novel bioceramic (BC) with a control xenograft (BO) for guided bone regeneration (GBR) performed simultaneously with implant placement.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This clinical study enrolled patients with insufficient bone volume who required GBR during implant placement to increase bone width using either BC or BO. Outcome measures included a dimensional reduction in buccal bone thickness measured by cone beam computed tomography performed immediately post-surgery and at 6 months postoperatively (ΔHBBT), soft tissue healing at 14 days, 1 month, and 6 months postoperatively, and complications rates. The primary outcome was the change in buccal bone thickness around the implant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the total 152 patients included, 76 from each group received BC and BO treatments. The ΔHBBT in BC and BO groups were -0.276 mm (-0.432, -0.121) and -0.614 mm (-0.769, -0.459) mm, respectively, rejecting the null hypothesis. No significant difference in soft tissue healing was observed between the two groups, with no inflammatory changes in 96.05% and 90.79% of the BC and BO groups, respectively, at 2 weeks postoperatively. However, the BC group exhibited a lower overall complication rate (3.95%), including mild inflammation, poor soft tissue healing, and bone graft extrusion in 3 out of 76 patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both BC and BO demonstrated favorable outcomes in bone regeneration and soft tissue healing when used for simultaneous implant placement and bone augmentation.</p>","PeriodicalId":93944,"journal":{"name":"Clinical implant dentistry and related research","volume":"27 1","pages":"e13437"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical implant dentistry and related research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.13437","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: To compare the clinical effectiveness of a novel bioceramic (BC) with a control xenograft (BO) for guided bone regeneration (GBR) performed simultaneously with implant placement.
Materials and methods: This clinical study enrolled patients with insufficient bone volume who required GBR during implant placement to increase bone width using either BC or BO. Outcome measures included a dimensional reduction in buccal bone thickness measured by cone beam computed tomography performed immediately post-surgery and at 6 months postoperatively (ΔHBBT), soft tissue healing at 14 days, 1 month, and 6 months postoperatively, and complications rates. The primary outcome was the change in buccal bone thickness around the implant.
Results: Of the total 152 patients included, 76 from each group received BC and BO treatments. The ΔHBBT in BC and BO groups were -0.276 mm (-0.432, -0.121) and -0.614 mm (-0.769, -0.459) mm, respectively, rejecting the null hypothesis. No significant difference in soft tissue healing was observed between the two groups, with no inflammatory changes in 96.05% and 90.79% of the BC and BO groups, respectively, at 2 weeks postoperatively. However, the BC group exhibited a lower overall complication rate (3.95%), including mild inflammation, poor soft tissue healing, and bone graft extrusion in 3 out of 76 patients.
Conclusions: Both BC and BO demonstrated favorable outcomes in bone regeneration and soft tissue healing when used for simultaneous implant placement and bone augmentation.