Lateral Guided Bone Regeneration Using a Novel Synthetic Bioresorbable Membrane: A Two Center Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Michal Halperin-Sternfeld, H. Zigdon-Giladi, L. Shapira, A. Wilensky
{"title":"Lateral Guided Bone Regeneration Using a Novel Synthetic Bioresorbable Membrane: A Two Center Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial","authors":"Michal Halperin-Sternfeld, H. Zigdon-Giladi, L. Shapira, A. Wilensky","doi":"10.31083/J.JMCM.2018.03.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of lateral guided bone regeneration (GBR) using a novel resorbable synthetic polyethylene-glycol/methacrylate (PEG/MET) membrane compared to a non-cross-linked collagen membrane (CM). Twentyeight patients with a potential implant site exhibiting insufficient bone width of ≤ 5 mm were included. Ridge width was measured intraoperatively at 1 mm and 4 mm apical to the crest and via cone-beam computed tomography at baseline and 6 months following GBR using either a PEG/MET or a CM in conjunction with an allograft. During implant placement, core biopsies were harvested and analyzed histomorphometrically. Width changes were calculated. Differences between groups were analyzed using two-sided t-test and Mann-Whitney U-test. The PEG/MET membrane was moldable and exhibited higher strength and stability compared to the CM. Nevertheless, it displayed higher exposure rate of 12/15, compared to 2/13 in the CM sites. At the time of implant insertion, 6 months following GBR, significant gain in bone width was observed in both groups. Mean ridge width at 1 mm and 4 mm apical to the crest was increased significantly from 2.06 ± 0.77 mm and 3.84 ± 1.23 mm to 3.84 ± 1.52 mm and 6.06 ± 2.03 mm (p = 0.0006 and p = 0.0009, respectively), with no clinical or radiographic differences between groups. Experimental sites contained more residual scaffold material than the controls (17.4 ± 3.3% and 8.6 ± 2.0%, p = 0.0566). However, bone and connective tissue area fraction were not statistically different between the groups. Overall, despite the higher exposure rate, the new PEG/MET membrane was as successful as a standard collagen membrane in lateral GBR and may have potential use in bone augmentation procedures. This study suggests the feasibility of synthetic membranes, which are not associated with disease transmission, as an attractive alternative to the commonly used CM of bovine or porcine origin.","PeriodicalId":92248,"journal":{"name":"Journal of molecular medicine and clinical applications","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of molecular medicine and clinical applications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31083/J.JMCM.2018.03.006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of lateral guided bone regeneration (GBR) using a novel resorbable synthetic polyethylene-glycol/methacrylate (PEG/MET) membrane compared to a non-cross-linked collagen membrane (CM). Twentyeight patients with a potential implant site exhibiting insufficient bone width of ≤ 5 mm were included. Ridge width was measured intraoperatively at 1 mm and 4 mm apical to the crest and via cone-beam computed tomography at baseline and 6 months following GBR using either a PEG/MET or a CM in conjunction with an allograft. During implant placement, core biopsies were harvested and analyzed histomorphometrically. Width changes were calculated. Differences between groups were analyzed using two-sided t-test and Mann-Whitney U-test. The PEG/MET membrane was moldable and exhibited higher strength and stability compared to the CM. Nevertheless, it displayed higher exposure rate of 12/15, compared to 2/13 in the CM sites. At the time of implant insertion, 6 months following GBR, significant gain in bone width was observed in both groups. Mean ridge width at 1 mm and 4 mm apical to the crest was increased significantly from 2.06 ± 0.77 mm and 3.84 ± 1.23 mm to 3.84 ± 1.52 mm and 6.06 ± 2.03 mm (p = 0.0006 and p = 0.0009, respectively), with no clinical or radiographic differences between groups. Experimental sites contained more residual scaffold material than the controls (17.4 ± 3.3% and 8.6 ± 2.0%, p = 0.0566). However, bone and connective tissue area fraction were not statistically different between the groups. Overall, despite the higher exposure rate, the new PEG/MET membrane was as successful as a standard collagen membrane in lateral GBR and may have potential use in bone augmentation procedures. This study suggests the feasibility of synthetic membranes, which are not associated with disease transmission, as an attractive alternative to the commonly used CM of bovine or porcine origin.
使用一种新型合成生物可吸收膜的侧导骨再生:一项双中心前瞻性随机对照试验
本研究的目的是评估使用新型可吸收合成聚乙二醇/甲基丙烯酸酯(PEG/MET)膜与非交联胶原膜(CM)进行横向引导骨再生(GBR)的效果。包括28例潜在种植部位骨宽度不足≤5mm的患者。术中测量脊宽为1毫米和4毫米,在基线和GBR后6个月通过锥束计算机断层扫描测量脊宽,使用PEG/MET或CM结合同种异体移植物。在植入期间,采集核心活检并进行组织形态学分析。计算宽度变化。组间差异分析采用双侧t检验和Mann-Whitney u检验。与CM相比,PEG/MET膜具有可塑性,具有更高的强度和稳定性。但其暴露率为12/15,高于CM位点的2/13。在GBR后6个月植入种植体时,两组骨宽度均显著增加。根尖至嵴1 mm和4 mm的平均脊宽从2.06±0.77 mm和3.84±1.23 mm显著增加到3.84±1.52 mm和6.06±2.03 mm (p = 0.0006和p = 0.0009),两组间无临床和影像学差异。试验点残余支架材料含量高于对照组(17.4±3.3%和8.6±2.0%,p = 0.0566)。然而,骨和结缔组织面积分数组间无统计学差异。总的来说,尽管暴露率更高,但新的PEG/MET膜在侧GBR中与标准胶原膜一样成功,可能在骨增强手术中有潜在的应用。这项研究表明,与疾病传播无关的合成膜作为一种有吸引力的替代常用的牛或猪源性膜的可行性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信