In implant dentistry, there is continuing debate regarding whether a barrier membrane should be applied to cover autologous bone grafts in jaw augmentation. A membrane would prevent graft remodeling with resorption and enhance graft incorporation. We hypothesized that membrane coverage does not effect resorption and incorporation of autologous onlay bone grafts. We treated 192 male Sprague-Dawley rats. A 4.0-mm-diameter bone graft was harvested from the right mandibular angle and transplanted to the left. Poly(DL-lactide-ε-caprolactone), collagen, and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene membranes were used to cover the grafts. The controls were left uncovered. Graft resorption at 2, 4, and 12 weeks was evaluated by post mortem microradiography and microCT. Analysis of the data showed no significant differences among the 4 groups. This demonstrates that the indication of barrier membrane use, to prevent bone remodeling with resorption and to enhance incorporation of autologous onlay bone grafts, is at least disputable.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alberius P, Dahlin C, Linde A -1992-. Role of osteopromotion in experimental bone grafting to the skull: a study in adult rats using a membrane technique. J Oral Maxillofac Surg50:829–834.
2.
Antoun H, Sitbon JM, Martinez H, Missika P -2001-. A prospective randomized study comparing two techniques of bone augmentation: onlay graft alone or associated with a membrane. Clin Oral Implants Res12:632–639.
3.
Bertleff MJ, Meek MF, Nicolai JP -2005-. A prospective clinical evaluation of biodegradable neurolac nerve guides for sensory nerve repair in the hand. J Hand Surg30:513–518.
4.
Buser D, Dula K, Hirt HP, Schenk RK -1996-. Lateral ridge augmentation using autografts and barrier membranes: a clinical study with 40 partially edentulous patients. J Oral Maxillofac Surg54:420–432.
5.
Chiapasco M, Abati S, Romeo E, Vogel G -1999-. Clinical outcome of autogenous bone blocks or guided bone regeneration with e-PTFE membranes for the reconstruction of narrow edentulous ridges. Clin Oral Implants Res10:278–288.
6.
Donos N, Kostopoulos L, Karring T -2002a-. Augmentation of the mandible with GTR and onlay cortical bone grafting. Clin Oral Implants Res13:175–184.
7.
Donos N, Kostopoulos L, Karring T -2002b-. Augmentation of the rat jaw with autogeneic cortico-cancellous bone grafts and guided tissue regeneration. Clin Oral Implants Res13:192–202.
8.
Gielkens PFM, Bos RRM, Raghoebar GM, Stegenga B -2007-. Is there evidence that barrier membranes prevent bone resorption in autologous bone grafts during the healing period? A systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants22:390–398.
9.
Gielkens PFM, Schortinghuis J, de Jong JR, Huysmans MC, van Leeuwen MBM, Raghoebar GM, et al. -2008-. A comparison of micro-CT, microradiography and histomorphometry in bone research. Arch Oral Biol53:558–566.
10.
Gordh M, Alberius P, Johnell O, Lindberg L, Linde A -1998-. Osteopromotive membranes enhance onlay integration and maintenance in the adult rat skull. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg27:67–73.
11.
Hardwick R, Scantlebury TV, Sanchez R, Whitley N, Ambruster J -1994-. Membrane design criteria for guided bone regeneration of the alveolar ridge. In: Guided bone regeneration in implant dentistry. Buser D, Dahlin C, Schenk RK, editors. Chicago: Quintessence, pp. 101–136.
12.
Jensen OT, Greer RO Jr, Johnson L, Kassebaum D -1995-. Vertical guided bone-graft augmentation in a new canine mandibular model. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants10:335–344.
13.
Kaban LB, Glowacki J -1981-. Induced osteogenesis in the repair of experimental mandibular defects in rats. J Dent Res60:1356–1364.
14.
Linde A, Alberius P, Dahlin C, Bjurstam K, Sundin Y -1993-. Osteopromotion: A soft-tissue exclusion principle using a membrane for bone healing and bone neogenesis. J Periodontol64-11 Suppl-:1116S–1128S.
15.
Machtei EE -2001-. The effect of membrane exposure on the outcome of regenerative procedures in humans: a meta-analysis. J Periodontol72:512–516.
16.
McAllister BS, Haghighat K -2007-. Bone augmentation techniques. J Periodontol78:377–396.
17.
Meek MF, Jansen K, Steendam R, van Oeveren W, van Wachem PB, van Luyn MJ -2004-. In vitro degradation and biocompatibility of poly-DL-lactide-epsilon-caprolactone- nerve guides. J Biomed Mater Res A68:43–51.
18.
Meijndert L, Raghoebar GM, Meijer HJA, Vissink A -2008-. Clinical and radiographic characteristics of single-tooth replacements preceded by local ridge augmentation. Clin Oral Impl Res -in press-.
19.
Raghoebar GM, Liem RS, Bos RR, van der Wal JE, Vissink A -2006-. Resorbable screws for fixation of autologous bone grafts. Clin Oral Implants Res17:288–293.
20.
Rasmusson L, Meredith N, Kahnberg KE, Sennerby L -1999-. Effects of barrier membranes on bone resorption and implant stability in onlay bone grafts. An experimental study. Clin Oral Implants Res10:267–277.
21.
Salata LZ, Rasmusson L, Kahnberg KE -2002-. Effects of a mechanical barrier on the integration of cortical onlay bone grafts placed simultaneously with endosseous implant. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res4:60–68.
22.
Schortinghuis J, Ruben JL, Meijer HJA, Bronckers ALJJ, Raghoebar GM, Stegenga B -2003-. Microradiography to evaluate bone growth into a rat mandibular defect. Arch Oral Biol48:155–160.
23.
Stavropoulos F, Dahlin C, Ruskin JD, Johansson C -2004-. A comparative study of barrier membranes as graft protectors in the treatment of localized bone defects. An experimental study in a canine model. Clin Oral Implants Res15:435–442.
24.
Von Arx T, Cochran DL, Schenk RK, Buser D -2002-. Evaluation of a prototype trilayer membrane -PTLM- for lateral ridge augmentation: an experimental study in the canine mandible. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg31:190–199.
25.
Zellin G, Linde A -1997-. Importance of delivery systems for growth-stimulatory factors in combination with osteopromotive membranes. An experimental study using rhBMP-2 in rat mandibular defects. J Biomed Mater Res35:181–190.
