Author:

Keywords:

biomaterials, bone, case series, dental implants, tooth extraction, tooth socket, sinus augmentation, ridge preservation, humans, defects, membrane, regeneration, bio-oss(r), dimensions, lesions, Science & Technology, Life Sciences & Biomedicine, Dentistry, Oral Surgery & Medicine, RIDGE PRESERVATION, MEMBRANE, DEFECTS, AUGMENTATION, REGENERATION, BIO-OSS(R), DIMENSIONS, FILLER, CORAL, Adult, Alveolar Bone Loss, Animals, Biocompatible Materials, Bone Matrix, Bone Regeneration, Bone Substitutes, Calcium Carbonate, Cattle, Dental Implantation, Endosseous, Dental Implants, Dental Prosthesis Retention, Female, Guided Tissue Regeneration, Periodontal, Humans, Lactic Acid, Male, Membranes, Artificial, Middle Aged, Minerals, Osseointegration, Polyglycolic Acid, Polylactic Acid-Polyglycolic Acid Copolymer, Tooth Extraction, Tooth Socket, 1105 Dentistry, Dentistry, 3203 Dentistry

Abstract:

Background: Adequate bone volume is imperative for the osseointegration of endosseous implants, but post-extraction resorption and remodeling may challenge implant placement. The use of bone biomaterials has been advocated to fill extraction sites and to enhance primary implant stability during osseointegration. The objective of the case series was to evaluate bone formation histologically and biomechanically in extraction sites following implantation of three commercially available bone biomaterials to compare their ability to allow guided bone regeneration.