260 | ABSTRACTS

BX3 J6 e P OS TE R
C LI N I C A L R E S E A RC H S U RG E RY

Regeneration of peri-implant dehiscence defects using a synthetic biomaterial. A randomized

controlled clinical trial
Eduardo Montero1; Ignacio Sanz-Sánchez1; Martina La Rosa1; Anna Seidel1; Jae-kook Cha2; Ui-won Jung2; Mariano Sanz1
1
University Complutense of Madrid, Madrid, Spain; 2College of Dentistry, Yonsei University, Seoul, South Korea

Background: Deproteinised bovine bone mineral (DBBM) has been widely documented as a biomimetic osteoconductive biomaterial. However,
the use of xenogeneic biomaterials is not exempted from potential hazards, such as disease transmission or immunogenicity, which has pro-
moted the active research on a new generation of synthetic bone substitutes (SBS) with similar physic-chemical characteristics to natural bone.
Aim/Hypothesis: To test whether a guided bone regeneration (GBR) procedure for the treatment of peri-implant dehiscence defects based on
the use of a synthetic bone substitute achieves NO-inferior outcomes when compared to the same procedure using a deproteinized bovine
bone mineral (DBBM).
Materials and Methods: The study was designed as a multicenter randomized clinical trial (RCT). Patients were included if they were expected
to present a peri-implant bone dehiscence ≥ 3 mm after implant placement. Implant position was assured by the use of a guided surgery stent.
Grafting materials were a synthetic bone substitute in the test group and a deproteinized bovine bone mineral in the control. A crossed-link
collagen membrane was placed in both groups following the principles of GBR. Re-entry surgery was performed 6 months after implantation.
Primary outcome measure was defect height (DH) resolution between baseline and 6 months, measured with a UNC15 periodontal probe.
Additionally, volumetric changes of the augmented area were assessed by means of an intraoral scanner.
Results: 17 patients have been enrolled, 6 in the control group and 11 in the test group. 12 out of the 17 dehiscence type defects (70.6%) were
completely resolved at the time of re-entry. In the test group, the percentage of DH resolution was 94.3% (6.0 ± 5.0 mm), while in the control
group was 88.2% (3.8 ± 4.3 mm), without statistically significant differences between groups. The depreciated bone volume between initial
surgery and re-entry was 34.9% in the test group and 43.2% in the control group, without significant differences.
Conclusions and Clinical Implications: Within the limitations of this preliminary evaluation, it can be concluded that the analyzed synthetic
bone graft is NO-inferior to the reference bone substitute in guided bone regeneration simultaneous to implant placement of peri-implant
bone dehiscences.
Keywords: bone substitutes, guided bone regeneration, dehiscence defects