Cytoflex Barrier Membrane Clinical Evaluation

Similar documents
REGENERATIONTIME. A Case Report by. Ridge Augmentation and Delayed Implant Placement on an Upper Lateral Incisor

The Original remains unique.

Cerasorb M DENTAL. O:\Zulassung\Cerasorb Dental Kanada 2013\Texte\Cerasorb M Dental final IFU docx

Procedure Manual and Catalog

Inion GTR Biodegradable Membrane System

Immediate Implants: New Opportunities and Contraindications

Clinical Case Reports using Cytoplast GTR Barrier Membranes

Horizontal bone augmentation by means of guided bone regeneration

Bringing you Geistlich biocompatibility with improved application and handling benefits. Your combination for success

Case Study. Case # 1 Author: Dr. Suheil Boutros (USA) 2013 Zimmer Dental, Inc. All rights reserved. 6557, Rev. 03/13.

Redefining Regeneration

Guided Tissue and Bone Regeneration

We want to keep you smiling. Bone regeneration with Geistlich Bio-Oss and Geistlich Bio-Gide

BONE GRAFTING. Product Catalog

RELIABLE WHEN IT COUNTS. The unique collagenase-resistant membrane protects bone graft and supports treatment success even when exposed 4

We Want to Keep You Smiling. Bone Regeneration with Geistlich Bio-Oss and Geistlich Bio-Gide

BioVin Collagen Membrane

Resorbable bilayer synthetic membrane Biomimetic tissue-engineered matrix for GBR and GTR

a closer look at Cytoplast High Density PTFE performance predictability efficacy High-Density PTFE (dptfe)

A new approach with an in-situ self-hardening grafting material

Bone Grafting for Socket Preservation

botiss dental bone & tissue regeneration biomaterials collacone max Innovative composite matrix socket preservation form-fitting resorbable composite

Versatile grafting Solutions

Product Information. MIS Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

Surgical Procedure in Guided Tissue Regeneration with the. Inion GTR Biodegradable Membrane System

A wide variety of membrane options

Consensus Report Tissue augmentation and esthetics (Working Group 3)

Strong bone for beautiful teeth. Patient Information I Bone reconstruction with Geistlich Bio-Oss and Geistlich Bio-Gide

Technique Guide. SynPOR Porous Polyethylene Implants. For craniofacial and orbital augmentation and reconstruction.

botiss biomaterials bone & tissue regeneration collacone max Innovative composite matrix socket preservation form-fitting resorbable composite

Gingivectomy, excision gingival, each quadrant Gingivoplasty, each quadrant

Dental Implants: A Predictable Solution for Tooth Loss. Reena Talwar, DDS PhD FRCD(C) Oral & Maxillofacial Surgeon Associate Clinical Professor

Regaining your gum tissue. Soft tissue regeneration with Geistlich Mucograft

Bone augmentation with biomaterials

MEDPOR. Oral maxillofacial surgery

Evaluation of different grafting materials in three-wall intra-bony defects around dental implants in beagle dogs

CELLPLEX TCP SYNTHETIC CANCELLOUS BONE

Alveolar Ridge Preservation:

HeliMEND Advanced. Absorbable Collagen Membrane. Instructions for Use

Tooth out what's next?

SYNPOR POROUS POLYETHYLENE IMPLANTS. For craniofacial and orbital augmentation and reconstruction

Innovative Range of Regenerative Solutions

Bone augmentation with maxgraft

Socket Graft Plus. Case Presentation. Ideal Bone Graft for All Socket Grafting Situations. Case #1

More than bone regeneration. A total solution.

HDS PROCEDURE CODE GUIDELINES

OSSIX PLUS The Resorbable Collagen Membrane Instructions for Use for OSSIX PLUS

The Essential Choice. With the Benefits of Biologic Predictability

RPC. Surgical Solutions USA Regenerative Product Catalog

The Essential Choice. With the Benefits of Biologic Predictability

Regaining Your Gum Tissue. Soft-Tissue Regeneration With Geistlich Mucograft

Contemporary Periodontal Surgery

Immediate Implant Placement Along With Guided Bone Regeneration In Mandibular Anterior Region A Case Report.

Socket grafting and ridge preservation using Bond Apatite. Cases 1. Surgery Dr. David Baranes D.M.D

Management of a complex case

chronos Bone Void Filler. Beta-Tricalcium Phosphate ( β-tcp) bone graft substitute.

Contents HIOSSEN IMPLANT

Extraction with Immediate Implant Placement and Ridge Preservation in the Posterior

Surgical Solutions USA Regenerative Product Catalog USA

Soft-Tissue Success with the. Clinical Success. Proven Matrix. with the Proven. Geistlich Mucograft Geistlich Mucograft Seal

A WIDE RANGE OF REGENERATIVE SOLUTIONS

Clinical cases by Dr. Fernando Rojas-Vizcaya. botiss. dental bone & tissue regeneration. biomaterials. strictly biologic

botiss dental bone & tissue regeneration biomaterials mucoderm 3D-Regenerative Tissue Graft strictly biologic

Multi-Modality Anterior Extraction Site Grafting Increased Predictability for Aesthetics Michael Tischler, DDS

BONE AUGMENTATION AND GRAFTING

Clinical Success. with the Proven. Clinical Success. with the Proven Bone Substitute Products

Regeneration Bone Grafting & Soft Tissue Management

International Journal of Dentistry and Oral Health

REGENERATIONTIME. A Case Report by. Geistlich Mucograft for the treatment of multiple adjacent recession defects: A more palatable option

Osseointegrated dental implant treatment generally

Socket Treatment. Procedure Guide

Step-by-Step Step-by-Step. Internal Hex. Implant System MAKE IT SIMLE

30+ MEDPOR biomaterial. years of proven clinical history

SOCKET WHETHER TO PRESERVE IT NOW OR TO CREATE LATER? - A CASE REPORT

(866) Oragen Particulate Bone. and Tape. Calcium Sulfate Hemihydrate. Membranes. NuOss

Over the years, mucogingival surgery

Symbios Xenograft Granules Porcine Bone Graft Material

Complications of postoperative swelling of the maxillary sinus membrane after sinus floor augmentation

hard tissue maxgraft cortico Surgical guide botiss biomaterials innovative efficient atraumatic Prefabricated allogenic bone plate

Rehabilitating a Compromised Site for Restoring Form, Function and Esthetics- A Case Report

Bone Grafting and Immediate Implant Placement in the Anterior

Maryland AGD AE and Socket Grafting 2015

11/4/13. Ultrasonically Fabricated Barriers in GBR. Ultrasonically Fabricated Barriers in GBR

Which reconstructive procedures are effective for treating the periodontal intraosseous defect?

Patient's Guide to Dental Implants. an investment for a lifelong smile

Pre op Failed endodontic treatment with sinus involvement.

Regeneration Bone Grafting & Soft Tissue Management

Biomaterials Line. MIS Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

The anatomic limitations of the. Implant Installation With Simultaneous Ridge Augmentation. Report of Three Cases Jun-Beom Park, DDS, MSD, PhD*

MEDPOR. Oculoplastic surgery

Immediate Implant Placement:

Product Catalog. Dental Bone & Tissue Regeneration

Dental Research Journal

MANAGEMENT OF ATROPHIC ANTERIOR MAXILLA USING RIDGE SPLIT TECHNIQUE, IMMEDIATE IMPLANTATION AND TEMPORIZATION

Alveolar Ridge Augmentation with Titanium Mesh and Particulate Allograft A Case Report

Case Report. RapidSorb Rapid Resorbable Fixation System. Ridge augmentation in a one-step surgical protocol.

Surgical Therapy. Tuesday, April 2, 13. Alessan"o Geminiani, DDS, MS

Prosthodonticstown. Immediate Implant Placement in Fresh Extraction Sites. clinical. Table I

Transcription:

Cytoflex Barrier Membrane Clinical Evaluation Historical Background Guided tissue regeneration is a well established concept in the repair of oral bone defects. The exclusion of soft tissue epithelial and connective tissue cells from a bony defect, leading to enhanced bony repair is scientifically sound and has been proven clinically. Several types of membrane materials, including dense non-porous PTFE, porous expanded PTFE and certain resorbable membrane materials have been used in periodontal and oral surgery with success. Current evidence suggests that the physical blockade of cell migration is primarily responsible for the enhanced healing and regeneration. Porous-ePTFE (P-ePTFE) and Non-Porous-PTFE (NP-ePTFE) Many different membrane materials are currently available for clinical applications, including cellulose, collagen, polylactic acid, polyglycolic acid and lactide/glycolide copolymers and PTFE. Due to its superior biocompatibility and long history of use, the first generation, highly porous expanded PTFE membrane (P-ePTFE) has received the most attention in the literature. The large porosity of P-ePTFE allows tissue integration within the barrier membrane and minimizes early exposure due to sloughing off of thin flaps. However, P-ePTFE often results in the heavy accumulation of microorganisms within the interstices of the material when exposed to the oral environment. In addition, it is very difficult for surgeon to remove the highly tissue-integrated porous barrier membrane at the end of the guided tissue regeneration process. Recently, a dense, non-porous PTFE membrane (NP-PTFE) has been proposed as a superior barrier membrane for alveolar ridge preservation and reconstruction. The smooth, non-porous PTFE membrane precludes the connective tissue and cells from migrating into the bony defect, prevents the accumulation of micro-organisms within the membrane and allows for easy removal of the membrane material after tissue regeneration. Nonetheless, the dense PTFE is stiffer and its smooth surface is difficult for cells and tissue to attach, often resulting in early flap sloughing off and exposure. As an improvement, NP-PTFE is embossed with micro texture to encourage tissue and cell attachment. NP-PTFE had been approved and is commercially available for clinical applications. Page 1 of 9

Micro-Porous-ePTFE (MP-ePTFE) has developed Cytoflex, a micro-porous eptfe barrier membrane (MP-ePTFE), which exhibits the synergic advantages of both porous and non-porous PTFE membranes. The micro pores allow certain nutrients to pass through the barrier membrane, but block the ingrowths of connective tissue, cells and micro organisms. Micro- porosity also enhances the adhesion of host cells to MP-ePTFE membrane, while still permitting the barrier to be removed with ease after wound healing. Objective of the Clinical Study The purpose of this investigation is to evaluate the soft tissue response to a MP-ePTFE barrier membrane and clinically evaluate the bone and bone graft healing under such a membrane. Study Design and Method This study is designed to evaluate the general applicability of the MP-ePTFE barrier that may be encountered by a private dental surgeon on a routine basis. The study was performed by a periodontal surgeon (Wang, Kungchun) at his private practice. The MP-ePTFE membranes were used as a barrier membrane over human tooth extraction sockets, periodontal infrabony defects and in conjunction with dental implants. The MP-ePTFE membranes were used alone or together with the use of bone grafting particulates. The pre- and post- operative radiographs and photographs were recorded and compared to assess the safety, effectiveness and general applicability of the material. All of the surgical procedures were performed under local infiltration anesthesia. The exposed defect surfaces were carefully debrided and root planed using both hand and ultrasonic instruments. All granulation tissue was removed. The material was trimmed and draped over the bony margins of the defect to extend 2-4 mm beyond the bony margins. The mucoperiosteal flaps were then re-approximated and closed with 4-0 silk suture. If bone grafting particulates were used, the defect was first filled with the bone substitute and then the membrane material was draped over the bone graft substance. Patients were informed about the clinical procedures, the material used and the need to have the barrier removed. Results In all, a total of six patients (2 for extraction sites, 2 for periodontal defects and 2 in conjunction with dental implants) received Cytoflex membranes for bone regeneration. There was no incidence of postoperative wound infection, inflammation or pain at the defect Page 2 of 9

site. There were no membranes lost in the immediate postoperative period. The suture was removed approximately 7 days, postoperatively. There was no adverse tissue response to the implanted membrane. Epithelial migration over the exposed membrane was observed in several cases. Membranes were removed 3-6 weeks postoperatively depending on the individual amount of tissue overgrowth. At the time of removal, the membrane material was grasped with a small forceps and removed with a gentle tug. The soft tissue exhibited excellent response to the MP-ePTFE membranes used in this study. No inflammation, infection or adverse reactions that can be attributed to the membrane material were observed. The underlying tissue following 3 weeks or more of healing was found to resemble a dense, fibrous connective tissue which was in intimate contact with the inferior surface of the membrane. In the cases of extraction site reconstruction, there was no invagination, contraction, or collapse of the surrounding tissue as is seen in a conventionally treated extraction site. For patients that were treated with bone substitute and the placement of a MP-ePTFE membrane, the bone substitute particles appeared to be consolidated in the defect in a stroma of fibrous connective tissue following membrane removal. This technique resulted in the incorporation of a very high percentage of graft material when compared to conventional grafting techniques without the use of a barrier membrane. Discussion and Conclusions The material is very easy to use and conform to the wound margins due to its compliance and lack of material memory. During retrieval, the MP-ePTFE membrane can be easily removed with a gentle tug without damaging the surrounding and underlying tissue. This seems to confirm that there is no tissue penetration and integration within the MP-ePTFE membrane. In several cases, the membrane was exposed, but the exposed surface was cleaned during revisit and did not cause infection or inflammation. This appears to indicate that the bacteria and infectious agents are blocked by the micro porous barrier membrane. Overall, the use of MP-ePTFE membranes for oral surgery appears to be safe and effective as illustrated by the three cases given below. The barrier membrane appears to enhance the wound healing by protecting the underlying defects from physical and bacterial contact. Page 3 of 9

Case Report 1 Tooth extraction site treated with resorbable bone substitute and MP-ePTFE membrane. This case describes the wound healing response in a patient whose tooth extraction site was grafted with a bioglass (Unigraft ) bone substitute and then covered with a MP-ePTFE membrane. During the complicated surgical extraction, the buccal wall of bone was lost due to ankylosis of the tooth root. The defect site was gently packed with bioglass bone substitute following tooth extraction and curettage of the tooth socket. The MP-ePTFE membrane was placed as a barrier over the bone graft material. At 30 days, the membrane was removed and a dense fibrous connective tissue bed was observed under the membrane. The appearance of the dense, fibrous connective tissue is clinically identical to that observed following the removal of Gore-Tex augmentation material (P-ePTFE). This technique allows for the placement of bone graft material into the tooth socket and rebuilds the lost buccal plate without a loss of graft material. Page 4 of 9

Figure 1. Extraction in maxilla with loss of buccal wall of bone. Figure 4. MP-ePTFE barrier material and healing tissue at 30 days postoperatively. Figure 2. Extraction site packed with Unigraft bioglass bone substitutes. Figure 5. Clinical view at 30 days with barrier removed. There is a dense fibrous connective tissue bed which follows the contours of the barrier material. There is no collapse or concavity as would be expected in an untreated extraction site. Figure 3. MP-ePTFE membrane in situ. The margins of the material extend 2-3 mm beyond the margins of the defect. Page 5 of 9

Case Report 2 Treatment of severe periodontal defect with MP-ePTFE membrane. This case describes the use of MP-ePTFE in the treatment of a patient with a deep circumferential periodontal defect. The exposed root surfaces were carefully debrided and root planed using both hand and ultrasonic instruments. All granulation tissue was removed. MP-ePTFE membrane was placed over the bony margins and tucked under the mucoperiosteal flaps as a temporary barrier to protect the infrabony defect. The clinical view at 40 days after removal of barrier membrane is similar to that observed when the Gore-Tex membrane is removed. A 6-month postoperative radiograph shows significant regeneration of bony tissue emerging from the base of the defect. This case demonstrates the effectiveness of MP-ePTFE in the treatment of periodontal defects using guided tissue regeneration techniques. Page 6 of 9

Figure 1. Deep circumferential periodontal defect in the right maxilla Figure 4. Clinical view at 12 month post-operatively. Figure 2. Clinical view at 10 days postoperatively. Figure 5. Pre-surgical radiograph of a circumferential defect in the right maxilla. Figure 3. Clinical view at 40 days after removal of membrane. Figure 6. 6-month post-operative radiograph shows significant tissue regeneration at the base of the defect. Page 7 of 9

Case Report 3 Use of MP-ePTFE membrane in conjunction with placement of a titanium dental implant into a compromised extraction site. This case describes the clinical wound healing response in a patient in who was to receive a dental implant into a tooth extraction site immediately following extraction of the tooth. During the complicated extraction procedure, the buccal wall of bone was lost due to ankylosis of the tooth root. The case was treated with a MP-ePTFE membrane to prevent epithelial migration into the bony defect adjacent to the implant surface. The clinical results demonstrate that this material can prevent epithelial migration into bony defects. Page 8 of 9

Figure 1. Extraction site with loss of buccal wall, resulting in bony dehiscence. Figure 5. Clinical view at 21 days following membrane removal. Figure 2. Titanium implant in place. Figure 6. Clinical view of operative site 6-months postoperatively. Figure 3. MP-ePTFE membrane placed over dental implant and bony dehiscence. Figure 7. 6-months post-operative radiograph showing the titanium implant in place. Page 9 of 9