A randomized controlled trial comparing guided bone regeneration to connective tissue graft to re-establish buccal convexity at dental implant sites: Three-year results.

Objectives: To compare guided bone regeneration (GBR) to connective tissue graft (CTG) in terms of increase in buccal soft tissue profile (BSP) at three-year follow-up when applied at the buccal aspect of single implant sites demonstrating a minor horizontal alveolar defect.

Materials And Methods: Patients with a single tooth gap in the anterior maxilla and horizontal alveolar defect were enrolled in a single-blind RCT. All sites had a bucco-palatal bone dimension of at least 6 mm, received a single implant at least 3 months after tooth removal and were randomly allocated to the control (GBR) or test group (CTG) to re-establish buccal soft tissue convexity.

A 3-Year Prospective Study on a Porcine-Derived Acellular Collagen Matrix to Re-Establish Convexity at the Buccal Aspect of Single Implants in the Molar Area: A Volumetric Analysis.

Background: Xenogeneic soft tissue substitutes are currently being investigated as an alternative to subepithelial connective tissue grafts (CTG) with the intention to avoid postoperative morbidity associated with autologous grafting. The aim of the present study was to volumetrically evaluate the effectiveness and mid-long-term stability of a porcine-derived collagen matrix (PDCM) (Mucoderm, Botiss gmbh, Berlin, Germany) in increasing soft tissue volume at the buccal aspect of molar implant sites.

Methods: Periodontally healthy non-smoking patients with a single tooth gap in the molar area were selected for a prospective case series.

A randomized controlled study on the accuracy of free-handed, pilot-drill guided and fully guided implant surgery in partially edentulous patients.

Aim: To compare the accuracy of free-handed (FH), pilot-drill guided (PG) and fully guided (FG) implant surgery.

Materials And Methods: Partially edentulous patients in need of ≥2 implants in the posterior maxilla were randomly allocated to one of the following treatment groups: FH, PG and FG. Ideal implant positions were determined in designated software following the fusion of bony information (CBCT data in DICOM format) to the prosthetic wax-up (optical scan data in STL format).