Abstract
Objectives: The aim of the study was to test whether or not the use of a polyethylene glycol (PEG) hydrogel with or without the addition of an arginylglycylaspartic acid (RGD) sequence applied as a matrix in combination with hydroxyapatite/tricalciumphosphate (HA/TCP) results in similar peri-implant bone regeneration as traditional guided bone regeneration procedures. Material and methods: In 12 beagle dogs, implant placement and peri-implant bone regeneration were performed 2 months after tooth extraction in the maxilla. Two standardized box-shaped defects were bilaterally created, and dental implants were placed in the center of the defects with a dehiscence of 4 mm. Four treatment modalities were randomly applied: i)HA/TCP mixed with a synthetic PEG hydrogel, ii)HA/TCP mixed with a synthetic PEG hydrogel supplemented with an RGD sequence, iii)HA/TCP covered with a native collagen membrane (CM), iv)and no bone augmentation (empty). After a healing period of 8 or 16 weeks, micro-CT and histological analyses were performed. Results: Histomorphometric analysis revealed a greater relative augmented area for groups with bone augmentation (43.3%–53.9% at 8 weeks, 31.2%–42.8% at 16 weeks) compared to empty controls (22.9% at 8 weeks, 1.1% at 16 weeks). The median amount of newly formed bone was greatest in group CM at both time-points. Regarding the first bone-to-implant contact, CM was statistically significantly superior to all other groups at 8 weeks. Conclusions: Bone can partially be regenerated at peri-implant buccal dehiscence defects using traditional guided bone regeneration techniques. The use of a PEG hydrogel applied as a matrix mixed with a synthetic bone substitute material might lack a sufficient stability over time for this kind of defect.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | e76-e83 |
| Journal | Clinical Oral Implants Research |
| Volume | 28 |
| Issue number | 7 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2017 Jul |
Fingerprint
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Oral Surgery
Cite this
}
Bone augmentation at peri-implant dehiscence defects comparing a synthetic polyethylene glycol hydrogel matrix vs. standard guided bone regeneration techniques. / Thoma, Daniel S.; Jung, Ui Won; Park, Jin Young; Bienz, Stefan P.; Hüsler, Jürg; Jung, Ronald E.
In: Clinical Oral Implants Research, Vol. 28, No. 7, 07.2017, p. e76-e83.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
TY - JOUR
T1 - Bone augmentation at peri-implant dehiscence defects comparing a synthetic polyethylene glycol hydrogel matrix vs. standard guided bone regeneration techniques
AU - Thoma, Daniel S.
AU - Jung, Ui Won
AU - Park, Jin Young
AU - Bienz, Stefan P.
AU - Hüsler, Jürg
AU - Jung, Ronald E.
PY - 2017/7
Y1 - 2017/7
N2 - Objectives: The aim of the study was to test whether or not the use of a polyethylene glycol (PEG) hydrogel with or without the addition of an arginylglycylaspartic acid (RGD) sequence applied as a matrix in combination with hydroxyapatite/tricalciumphosphate (HA/TCP) results in similar peri-implant bone regeneration as traditional guided bone regeneration procedures. Material and methods: In 12 beagle dogs, implant placement and peri-implant bone regeneration were performed 2 months after tooth extraction in the maxilla. Two standardized box-shaped defects were bilaterally created, and dental implants were placed in the center of the defects with a dehiscence of 4 mm. Four treatment modalities were randomly applied: i)HA/TCP mixed with a synthetic PEG hydrogel, ii)HA/TCP mixed with a synthetic PEG hydrogel supplemented with an RGD sequence, iii)HA/TCP covered with a native collagen membrane (CM), iv)and no bone augmentation (empty). After a healing period of 8 or 16 weeks, micro-CT and histological analyses were performed. Results: Histomorphometric analysis revealed a greater relative augmented area for groups with bone augmentation (43.3%–53.9% at 8 weeks, 31.2%–42.8% at 16 weeks) compared to empty controls (22.9% at 8 weeks, 1.1% at 16 weeks). The median amount of newly formed bone was greatest in group CM at both time-points. Regarding the first bone-to-implant contact, CM was statistically significantly superior to all other groups at 8 weeks. Conclusions: Bone can partially be regenerated at peri-implant buccal dehiscence defects using traditional guided bone regeneration techniques. The use of a PEG hydrogel applied as a matrix mixed with a synthetic bone substitute material might lack a sufficient stability over time for this kind of defect.
AB - Objectives: The aim of the study was to test whether or not the use of a polyethylene glycol (PEG) hydrogel with or without the addition of an arginylglycylaspartic acid (RGD) sequence applied as a matrix in combination with hydroxyapatite/tricalciumphosphate (HA/TCP) results in similar peri-implant bone regeneration as traditional guided bone regeneration procedures. Material and methods: In 12 beagle dogs, implant placement and peri-implant bone regeneration were performed 2 months after tooth extraction in the maxilla. Two standardized box-shaped defects were bilaterally created, and dental implants were placed in the center of the defects with a dehiscence of 4 mm. Four treatment modalities were randomly applied: i)HA/TCP mixed with a synthetic PEG hydrogel, ii)HA/TCP mixed with a synthetic PEG hydrogel supplemented with an RGD sequence, iii)HA/TCP covered with a native collagen membrane (CM), iv)and no bone augmentation (empty). After a healing period of 8 or 16 weeks, micro-CT and histological analyses were performed. Results: Histomorphometric analysis revealed a greater relative augmented area for groups with bone augmentation (43.3%–53.9% at 8 weeks, 31.2%–42.8% at 16 weeks) compared to empty controls (22.9% at 8 weeks, 1.1% at 16 weeks). The median amount of newly formed bone was greatest in group CM at both time-points. Regarding the first bone-to-implant contact, CM was statistically significantly superior to all other groups at 8 weeks. Conclusions: Bone can partially be regenerated at peri-implant buccal dehiscence defects using traditional guided bone regeneration techniques. The use of a PEG hydrogel applied as a matrix mixed with a synthetic bone substitute material might lack a sufficient stability over time for this kind of defect.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84971015105&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84971015105&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/clr.12877
DO - 10.1111/clr.12877
M3 - Article
C2 - 27206342
AN - SCOPUS:84971015105
VL - 28
SP - e76-e83
JO - Clinical Oral Implants Research
JF - Clinical Oral Implants Research
SN - 0905-7161
IS - 7
ER -