Please activate JavaScript!
Please install Adobe Flash Player, click here for download
ePaper created 2017-12-06, 12:03:50 | version 1.38.0
industry | Fig. 14 Fig. 18 Fig. 15 Fig. 16 Fig. 17 A simultaneous implant insertion was performed in the third and fourth quadrant in region 36 and 46 (Fig. 17). After a six-month healing phase, the im- plants were exposed and a prosthetic solution was fabricated (Fig. 18). Summary Today, different bone grafting materials with dif- ferent properties and approaches are available for preservation, augmentation and reconstruction of the dental bone ridge. The systematic purpose of this study was to compare CERASORB® M and Osbone®. The products were evaluated regarding their chemical and biological properties and the following clinical applications: 1. Filling and reconstruction of complex three dimen- sional bone defects. 2. Ridge augmentation in atrophied bone regions (si- nus floor elevation and subantral augmentation). 3. Filling of alveolar defects after tooth extraction for the purpose of alveolar ridge preservation and cre- ation of an implant bed, or filling of defects after operative removal of retained teeth—as well as cor- rective osteotomies or multisided bone defects of the alveolar processes and the facial skull. 4. Filling of two- or multisided bone pockets and bi- as well as trifurcation defects. 5. Supporting function for a membrane with the Guided Tissue Regeneration (GTR). The comparison showed the following results: Both materials are of biomimetic origin and therefore free of foreign materials or allergens. A good biocom- patibility is guaranteed by the interconnecting, open- celled and porous structure. The -TCP offers advan- tages for cyst defect filling, as the goal is a physiological bone regeneration. Both materials are suitable for the sinus lift; however, the thickness of the Schneiderian Membrane has to be considered. If the membrane is thin, -TCP has to be applied be- cause of its polygonal structure. Fig. 14: Extensive maxillary bone atrophy. Fig. 15: Implantation via guided-implant surgery template. Fig. 16: Lateral bone augmentation. Fig. 17: Simultaneous implant insertion. Fig. 18: Prosthetic restoration. The hydroxyapatite should be preferred for lateral bone augmentation. In case of poor bone quality (D3/ D4) and/or two-sided procedure, the hydroxyapatite should also be used due to its higher volume stability. CERASORB® M should be preferred for the filling of alveolar defects without a subsequent implant inser- tion or for single tooth defects; Osbone® should be chosen for multisided defects. For the purpose of two- or multisided bone pockets as well as bi- and tri- furcation defects, and for the supporting function of a membrane both materials are suitable. Because of its constant volume, the hydroxyapatite should be preferred for vertical and lateral augmentation as well as for peri-implantitis._ contact Dr Dr Arwed Ludwig MGK Medizinische und Gesichtschirurgische Klinik Neue Fahrt 12 34117 Kassel, Germany Tel.: +49 561 9985990 aludwig@gwdg.de www.mgk-chirurgie.de Author details implants 4 2017 41