scholarly journals Barrier membranes for guided bone regeneration

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 114-118
Author(s):  
A. A. Kulakov ◽  
V. A. Badalyan ◽  
Tursunbay K. Khamraev ◽  
A. S. Kasparov ◽  
V. A. Brutyan
Keyword(s):  
Bone Regeneration ◽  
English Language ◽  
Surgical Techniques ◽  
Guided Bone Regeneration ◽  
Barrier Membranes ◽  
Wire Frame ◽  
Literary Sources ◽  
Regeneration Procedure

The aim of this study was to review the possibilities of using the various types of membranes currently available and used in the guided bone regeneration procedure. Literary sources were analyzed, including English-language articles from the pubmed and elibrary information portals. For horizontal defects, it is most preferable to use resorbable membranes with various modifications of surgical techniques, while for vertical defects, the use of wire-frame non-reabsorbable membranes is most acceptable.

scholarly journals Comparative In Vivo Analysis of the Integration Behavior and Immune Response of Collagen-Based Dental Barrier Membranes for Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR)

Membranes ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. 712
Author(s):  
Milena Radenković ◽  
Said Alkildani ◽  
Ignacio Stoewe ◽  
James Bielenstein ◽  
Bernd Sundag ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Wound Healing ◽  
Bone Regeneration ◽  
Barrier Function ◽  
Guided Bone Regeneration ◽  
Collagen Membrane ◽  
Cellular Infiltration ◽  
Barrier Membranes ◽  
Tissue Integration ◽  
Tissue Reactions

Collagen-based resorbable barrier membranes have been increasingly utilized for Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR), as an alternative to non-resorbable synthetic membranes that require a second surgical intervention for removal. One of the most important characteristics of a resorbable barrier membrane is its mechanical integrity that is required for space maintenance and its tissue integration that plays a crucial role in wound healing and bone augmentation. This study compares a commercially available porcine-derived sugar-crosslinked collagen membrane with two non-crosslinked collagen barrier membranes. The material analysis provides an insight into the influence of manufacturing on the microstructure. In vivo subcutaneous implantation model provides further information on the host tissue reaction of the barrier membranes, as well as their tissue integration patterns that involve cellular infiltration, vascularization, and degradation. The obtained histochemical and immunohistochemical results over three time points (10, 30, and 60 days) showed that the tissue response to the sugar crosslinked collagen membrane involves inflammatory macrophages in a comparable manner to the macrophages observed in the surrounding tissue of the control collagen-based membranes, which were proven as biocompatible. The tissue reactions to the barrier membranes were additionally compared to wounds from a sham operation. Results suggest wound healing properties of all the investigated barrier membranes. However, the sugar-crosslinked membrane lacked in cellular infiltration and transmembraneous vascularization, providing an exclusive barrier function in GBR. Moreover, this membrane maintained a similar swelling ratio over examined timepoints, which suggests a very slow degradation pattern and supports its barrier function. Based on the study results, which showed biocompatibility of the sugar crosslinked membrane and its stability up to 60 days post-implantation, it can be concluded that this membrane may be suitable for application in GBR as a biomaterial with exclusive barrier functionality, similar to non-resorbable options.

scholarly journals Selection of Collagen Membranes for Bone Regeneration: A Literature Review

Materials ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 786 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luca Sbricoli ◽  
Riccardo Guazzo ◽  
Marco Annunziata ◽  
Luca Gobbato ◽  
Eriberto Bressan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Regeneration ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Guided Bone Regeneration ◽  
Treatment Modalities ◽  
Barrier Membranes ◽  
Collagen Membranes ◽  
Collagen Versus ◽  
The Right ◽  
Grafting Materials ◽  
Selection Of

Several treatment modalities have been proposed to regenerate bone, including guided bone regeneration (GBR) where barrier membranes play an important role by isolating soft tissue and allowing bone to grow. Not all membranes biologically behave the same way, as they differ from their origin and structure, with reflections on their mechanical properties and on their clinical performance. Collagen membranes have been widely used in medicine and dentistry, because of their high biocompatibility and capability of promoting wound healing. Recently, collagen membranes have been applied in guided bone regeneration with comparable outcomes to non-resorbable membranes. Aim of this work is to provide a review on the main features, application, outcomes, and clinical employment of the different types of collagen membranes. Comparisons with non-resorbable membranes are clarified, characteristics of cross-linked collagen versus native collagen, use of different grafting materials and need for membrane fixation are explored in order to gain awareness of the indications and limits and to be able to choose the right membrane required by the clinical condition.

scholarly journals Minimally guided bone regeneration procedure for immediate implant placement and provisionalization of a maxillary lateral incisor: A case report

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-49
Author(s):  
Abdulreza Fattahian ◽  
Farzaneh Poursafar ◽  
Siamak Yaghobee
Keyword(s):  
Bone Regeneration ◽  
Guided Bone Regeneration ◽  
Lateral Incisor ◽  
Patient Acceptance ◽  
Time Saving ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Regeneration Procedure ◽  
Immediate Implant ◽  
Maxillary Lateral Incisor ◽  
Ceramic Crown

Immediate implant placement has some advantages, such as time-saving, optimal soft tissue architecture preservation, and patient acceptance. In this case, prior to implant placement, minimally guided bone regeneration was performed to augment the concavity on the apico-labial aspect of a fractured maxillary right lateral incisor. After eight months, the tooth was extracted, and an implant was immediately inserted, and a provisional composite-based crown was delivered in the same appointment. After four months, well molded mid-facial gingiva and interproximal papilla were obtained, and a final metal-ceramic crown was fabricated.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document