Prikaz osnovnih podataka o dokumentu

dc.creatorJung, Ronald
dc.creatorKoković, Vladimir
dc.creatorJurišić, Milan
dc.creatorYaman, Duygu
dc.creatorSubramani, Karthikeyan
dc.creatorWeber, Franz E.
dc.date.accessioned2020-07-02T12:32:00Z
dc.date.available2020-07-02T12:32:00Z
dc.date.issued2011
dc.identifier.issn0905-7161
dc.identifier.urihttps://smile.stomf.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1610
dc.description.abstractObjectives: The aim of the present study was to compare a newly developed biodegradable polylactide/polyglycolide/N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (PLGA/NMP) membrane with a standard resorbable collagen membrane (RCM) in combination with and without the use of a bone substitute material (deproteinized bovine bone mineral [DBBM]) looking at the proposed tenting effect and bone regeneration. Materials and methods: In five adult German sheepdogs, the mandibular premolars P2, P3, P4, and the molar M1 were bilaterally extracted creating two bony defects on each site. A total of 20 dental implants were inserted and allocated to four different treatment modalities within each dog: PLGA/NMP membrane only (Test 1), PLGA/NMP membrane with DBBM (Test 2), RCM only (negative control), and RCM with DBBM (positive control). A histomorphometric analysis was performed 12 weeks after implantation. For statistical analysis, a Friedman test and subsequently a Wilcoxon signed ranks test were applied. Results: In four out of five PLGA/NMP membrane-treated defects, the membranes had broken into pieces without the support of DBBM. This led to a worse outcome than in the RCM group. In combination with DBBM, both membranes revealed similar amounts of area of bone regeneration and bone-to-implant contact without significant differences. On the level of the third implant thread, the PLGA/NMP membrane induced more horizontal bone formation beyond the graft than the RCM. Conclusion: The newly developed PLGA/NMP membrane performs equally well as the RCM when applied in combination with DBBM. Without bone substitute material, the PLGA/NMP membrane performed worse than the RCM in challenging defects, and therefore, a combination with a bone substitute material is recommended.en
dc.publisherWiley, Hoboken
dc.relationUniversity of Zurich
dc.relationUniversity of Belgrade
dc.rightsopenAccess
dc.sourceClinical Oral Implants Research
dc.subjectdog studyen
dc.subjectguided bone regenerationen
dc.subjectPLGA membraneen
dc.titleGuided bone regeneration with a synthetic biodegradable membrane: a comparative study in dogsen
dc.typearticle
dc.rights.licenseARR
dcterms.abstractЈунг, Роналд; Wебер, Франз Е.; Јуришић, Милан; Субрамани, Картхикеyан; Коковић, Владимир; Yаман, Дуyгу;
dc.citation.volume22
dc.citation.issue8
dc.citation.spage802
dc.citation.epage807
dc.citation.other22(8): 802-807
dc.citation.rankM21
dc.identifier.wos000292605600003
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02068.x
dc.identifier.pmid21198905
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-79960234809
dc.identifier.fulltexthttps://smile.stomf.bg.ac.rs/bitstream/id/3312/1605.pdf
dc.type.versionpublishedVersion


Dokumenti

Thumbnail

Ovaj dokument se pojavljuje u sledećim kolekcijama

Prikaz osnovnih podataka o dokumentu