Absorbable versus nonabsorbable membranes and bone grafts in the treatment of ligature‐induced peri‐implantitis defects in dogs

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to clinically evaluate an absorbable collagen membrane (Bio‐Gide®) and a nonabsorbable polytetrafluoroethylene membrane (PTFE), associated or not with bone grafts, for the treatment of ligature‐induced peri‐implantitis defects in dogs. The bilateral mandibular premolars were removed from 5 2‐year‐old mongrel dogs. After 3 months of healing, 3 titanium implants were placed on each side of the mandible. Experimental peri‐implantitis was induced after abutment connection. Ligatures and abutments were removed after 1 month and the bone defects were randomly assigned to one of the following treatments: DB: debridement alone; GBR+BG‐I: debridement plus PTFE membrane associated with mineralized bone graft (Bio‐Oss®); GBR+BG‐II: debridement plus collagen membrane (Bio‐Gide®) associated with mineralized bone graft; GBR‐I: debridement plus PTFE membrane; GBR‐II: debridement plus collagen membrane; BG: debridement plus mineralized bone graft. The peri‐implant bone defects were measured before and 5 months after treatment. Results showed the greatest percentage of vertical bone fill for GBR+BG‐II (27.77±14.07) followed by GBR‐II (21.78±16.19), BG (21.26±6.87), GBR+BG‐I (19.57±13.36), GBR‐I (18.86±10.63) and DB (14.03±5.6). However, the values were not statistically significant (ANOVA, contrast F test, P=0.612). Within the limits of the present investigation, it can be concluded that no difference was detected among treatments.