We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants



Forgotten password?


Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 12 (1997), No. 6     1. Nov. 1997
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 12 (1997), No. 6  (01.11.1997)

Page 844-852

Resorbable Versus Nonresorbable Membranes in Combination With Bio-Oss for Guided Bone Regeneration
Zitzmann, Nicola U. / Naef, Roger / Schärer, Peter
The purpose of this clinical investigation was to compare the new resorbable collagen membrane, Bio-Gide, to the conventional expanded polytetrafluoroethylene material (Gore-Tex) for guided bone regeneration in situations involving exposed implant surfaces. Over a 2-year period, 25 split-mouth patients were treated randomly: one defect site was treated with Bio-Gide and the other defect site with Gore-Tex; all 84 defects were filled with Bio-Oss and covered with the respective membrane. The defect types, their dimensions, and their morphology were measured in detail initially and at re-entry to allow for calculation of the exposed implant surface. Changes in defect surface for both types of membranes were statistically significant (P < .0001); however, no statistical significance (P > .94) could be detected between the two membranes. The mean average percentage of bone fill was 92% for Bio-Gide and 78% for Gore-Tex sites. In the latter group, 44% wound dehiscences and/or premature membrane removal occurred. The resorbable membrane, Bio-Gide, in combination with a bone graft, can be a useful alternative to the well-established expanded polytetrafluoroethylene membranes.

Keywords: biodegradable membranes, Bio-Oss, defect morphology, guided bone regeneration, implants, membrane exposures, nonresorbable membranes, timing of implant placement