Hard tissue changes after guided bone regeneration of peri‐implant defects comparing block versus particulate bone substitutes: 6‐month results of a randomized controlled clinical trial

This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.

OBJECTIVES: To test whether block bone substitute used for guided bone regeneration (GBR) of peri-implant defects leads to different thickness of the augmented hard tissue than particulate bone substitute. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In 24 patients, 24 two-piece dental implants were placed >4 months after tooth extraction. Following random allocation, 12 peri-implant bone dehiscences were grafted with an individually shaped block of deproteinized bovine-derived bone mineral (DBBM) and 12 bone dehiscences with particulate DBBM. All the sites were covered with a collagen membrane stabilized with resorbable pins. Immediately after wound closure and after 6 months, the horizontal thickness (HT) of the augmented hard tissue was measured at the level of implant shoulder using cone beam-computed tomography. RESULTS: After wound closure, the median HT measured 3.35 mm (mean: 3.38) in the block group and 2.85 mm (mean: 2.73) in the particulate group. At 6 months, the median HT decreased to 2.90 mm (mean: 2.71) in the block group and to 0.2 mm (mean: 0.52) in the particulate group. This difference was statistically significant (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Block bone substitute used for GBR of peri-implant defects was superior to particulate bone substitute regarding the dimension of the augmented hard tissue after 6 months of healing.