Evaluation of Guided Bone Regeneration around Oral Implants over Different Healing Times Using Two Different Bovine Bone Materials: A Randomized, Controlled Clinical and Histological Investigation

Purpose To evaluate the potential of two bone substitute materials and the influence of different healing periods in guided bone regeneration therapy of osseous defects around implants. Materials and Methods Twenty‐four edentulous patients received implants in the region of the lost lower incisors. Around two standardized osseous defects were created, treated either with a 50:50 mixture of PepGen P‐15® and OsteoGraf®/N‐700 (test group) or with BioOss® (control group), and covered with titanium membranes. After healing periods of 2, 4, 6, or 9 months, the implants were removed together with the surrounding bone and subsequently prepared for histological evaluations. Results Defect depths in both groups showed a clinical reduction after intervention. The histologically measured distance from the implant shoulder to the first point of bone‐implant contact (BIC) after treatment did not differ between the two groups. The healing time influenced the level of the first point of BIC, with a longer healing period producing a more coronal first point of BIC. A greater percentage BIC and a higher fraction of mineralized bone were found in the pristine bone area compared with the augmented defect area. Conclusion It can be concluded that in the treatment of osseous defects around oral implants, both materials were equally effective bone substitute materials when used in combination with guided bone regeneration.