Formation of bone around titanium implants placed into zero wall defects: pilot project using reinforced e-PTFE membrane and autogenous bone grafts.
BACKGROUND
Guided bone regeneration (GBR) frequently is used to augment implants with various types of bone defects. The defects often are grafted with different materials, yet there is insufficient evidence that these materials enhance bone-to-implant contacts.


OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this pilot project was to test the principle of GBR to promote bone formation adjacent to commercially pure titanium implants placed within zero-wall defects. Histologic and histomorphometric measurements were used to evaluate new bone formation.


METHODS
Under appropriate anesthesia, deep, wide defects were created within the mandibles of two large dogs. Buccolingual bone was removed to the depth of the defects leaving only the mesial and distal walls. Of the eight implants placed, three were augmented with titanium-reinforced expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (e-PTFE) barriers and autogenous bone chips. Three sites were augmented with barrier membranes only, and two sites were not augmented or grafted and served as controls. Seven months after surgery the dogs were sacrificed and block sections were taken for histologic evaluation.


RESULTS
Histologic and histomorphometric measurements were used to evaluate new bone formation. Results from this evaluation revealed bone formation at the membrane-only sites and the membrane-plus-bone grafted sites. The bone grafts were completely incorporated by the newly formed marginal compact bone. For all treated sites, there was poor bone-to-implant contact. Histomorphometric measurements showed a trend toward greater bone formation at membrane-treated sites compared with control sites. However, autogenous bone grafting did not seem to affect the amount of newly regenerated bone.


CONCLUSIONS
Within the limits of this pilot project, findings show trends toward bone healing, indicating constant and enhanced bone regeneration over the exposed implant. Bone contact to the implant surface generally was poor.
Akimoto
K
K
Department of Periodontics, University of Texas, Houston, Texas. kenaki@dd.catv.ne.jp
Becker
W
W
Donath
K
K
Becker
B E
BE
Sanchez
R
R
D000818:Animals; D001861:Bone Regeneration; D018786:Bone Substitutes; D016025:Bone Transplantation; D003758:Dental Implantation, Endosseous; D015921:Dental Implants; D004285:Dogs; D016557:Guided Tissue Regeneration, Periodontal / Q000379:methods*; D020007:Implants, Experimental; D008297:Male; D008567:Membranes, Artificial; D016348:Osseointegration; D010865:Pilot Projects; D011138:Polytetrafluoroethylene; D014025:Titanium
D018786:Bone Substitutes; D015921:Dental Implants; D008567:Membranes, Artificial; D011138:Polytetrafluoroethylene; D014025:Titanium