Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Geistlich Bio-Gide
More bone volume
Defect closure in % *
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
Control (no membrane) Synthetic test membrane ePTFE 22.8 2 weeks * The bars show the 95 % confidence intervals 60.2 26.9 4 weeks 88.7 32.8 12 weeks 90.0 Geistlich Bio-Gide
Significantly more bone formation and better defect closure were observed underneath Geistlich Bio-Gide.1 Defects without a membrane showed a 32.8 % defect closure after 12 weeks of healing, whereas similar defects covered by Geistlich Bio-Gide presented a 90.0 % closure (measured by microradiography and micro-CT imaging in a rat model).
More bone volume and improved bone quality lead to a higher implant survival rate3
Covering the defect with Geistlich Bio-Gide increases the bone density after 16 weeks significantly by 37.3 % compared to the use of Geistlich Bio-Oss alone.2 Bone density in the regenerated defect area (dog mandible) was measured by CT scan and compared to the intact adjacent alveolar bone.
ielkens PFM et al. Vivosorb, Geistlich Bio-Gide, and Gore-Tex as barrier membranes in rat mandibular defects: G an evaluation by microradiography and micro-CT. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 2008 May; 19(5): 516-21. im M et al. Effect of Bone Mineral with or without Collagen Membrane in Ridge Dehiscence Defects Following K Premolar Extraction. In Vivo. 2008; 22(2): 231-6. orton MR, Gamble C. Bone classification: an objective scale of bone dentisty using the computerized tomography N scan. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 2001; 12(1): 79-84.
Geistlich Bio-Gide is a native, porcine, resorbable collagen membrane. Due to its two layers (bilayer structure), it supports both bone 1, 2 and soft tissue regeneration.3, 4 The natural 3D structure of Geistlich Bio-Gide is degraded without inflammation and thus is highly biocompatible.5
Geistlich Bio-Gide 25 x 25 mm
Geistlich Bio-Gide 30 x 40 mm
1
Wallace SS et al. Sinus Augmentation Utilizing Anorganic Bovine Bone (Bio-Oss) with Absorbable and Nonabsorbable Membranes Placed over the Lateral Window: Histomorphometric and Clinical Analyses. Int. J. Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2005; 25(6): 551-9. allace SS, Froum SJ. Effect of Maxillary Sinus Augmentation on the Survival W of Endosseous Dental Implants. A Systematic Review. Ann. Periodontol. 2003; 8(1): 328-43. othamel D et al. Biocompatibility of various collagen membranes in cultures of R human PDL fibroblasts and human osteoblast-like cells. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 2004; 15(4): 443-9. othamel D et al. Biodegradation of differently cross-linked collagen membranes: R an experimental study in the rat. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 2005; 16(3): 369-78. itzmann NU et al. Resorbable Versus Nonresorbable Membranes in Combination Z with Geistlich Bio-Oss for guided Bone Regeneration. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants. 1997; 12(6): 844-52.
31296.1/0808/e