Clinical Research Directory
Browse clinical research sites, groups, and studies.
Titanium-Reinforced PTFE Membranes for Bone Augmentation
Sponsor: Universidade do Porto
Summary
This prospective comparative clinical study evaluated vertical and horizontal bone gain after guided bone regeneration using titanium-reinforced dense PTFE (TiR-dPTFE) membranes versus reinforced PTFE mesh (RPM) in patients requiring ridge augmentation prior to implant placement. Radiographic outcomes were assessed using CBCT at baseline, 9 months, and 12 months. Histological evaluation was performed in selected cases. Healing events and complications were recorded.
Official title: Vertical and Horizontal Ridge Augmentation With Titanium-Reinforced Dense PTFE Versus Reinforced PTFE Mesh: A Prospective Comparative Case Series
Key Details
Gender
All
Age Range
18 Years - Any
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Enrollment
14
Start Date
2022-04-01
Completion Date
2024-06-01
Last Updated
2026-04-09
Healthy Volunteers
No
Interventions
Titanium-reinforced dense PTFE membrane (TiR-dPTFE)
Guided bone regeneration (GBR) surgery for vertical and/or horizontal ridge augmentation prior to implant placement using a titanium-reinforced dense polytetrafluoroethylene membrane (TiR-dPTFE) to stabilize a particulate graft composed of autogenous bone chips and anorganic bovine bone mineral (60:40 ratio). The membrane was adapted to the defect morphology, stabilized with titanium fixation pins, and covered with a resorbable collagen membrane before tension-free primary closure. After 9 months, membrane removal and implant placement were performed with secondary protective augmentation (70:30 ABBM/autogenous). Allocation followed a prospective comparative protocol based on clinical indication.
Reinforced PTFE mesh (RPM)
Guided bone regeneration (GBR) surgery for vertical and/or horizontal ridge augmentation prior to implant placement using a reinforced PTFE mesh (RPM) to stabilize a particulate graft composed of autogenous bone chips and anorganic bovine bone mineral (60:40 ratio). The membrane was adapted to the defect morphology, stabilized with titanium fixation pins, and covered with a resorbable collagen membrane before tension-free primary closure. After 9 months, membrane removal and implant placement were performed with secondary protective augmentation (70:30 ABBM/autogenous). Allocation followed a prospective comparative protocol based on clinical indication.
Locations (1)
Faculty of Dental Medicine, University of Porto
Porto, Porto District, Portugal