Peer-Reviewed Bone Augmentation Study Reveals Excellent Results for Nobel Biocare Creos Xenoprotect

Posted on March 27, 2017

  • −  Prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial1 to assess the efficacy of creos xenoprotect, a native non-cross-linked collagen dental membrane

  • −  Treatment with creos xenoprotect results in successful bone augmentation of dehiscence defects at implant sites

  • −  81% reduction in defect height observed after six months with creos xenoprotect and is non-inferior to Bio-Gide®

  • −  Study published in peer-reviewed Clinical Oral Implants Research

    Zurich, Switzerland, March 27, 2017

    Results from a randomized controlled clinical trial have confirmed that creos xenoprotect, a resorbable, non-cross-linked collagen dental membrane, facilitates bone gain to support implant placement in dehiscence defects.

    The alveolar ridge may not present with the adequate dimensions required for implant placement. This may be corrected with guided bone regeneration (GBR), which has demonstrated high long-term implant survival rates2. Dr. Bastian Wessing and colleagues, in a multicenter, prospective study, placed implants to support single restorations in 49 patients, with bone augmentation material placed at dehisced implant sites. This material was immobilized with either creos xenoprotect (Nobel Biocare) or the reference membrane, Bio-Gide® (Geistlich). Both patients and evaluators were blinded to the treatment.

    The aim was to assess the clinical efficacy of creos xenoprotect and test its non-inferiority to Bio-Gide®. With creos xenoprotect, the investigators observed an 81% reduction in defect height six months following the augmentation procedure, compared with a 62% reduction with Bio-Gide®, a difference that was not statistically significant. There were also no statistically significant differences in soft tissue health parameters between the two groups. Moreover, there was a trend toward lower membrane exposure rates with creos xenoprotect than Bio-Gide®. This is consistent with a previously published retrospective clinical case series of patients treated with horizontal bone augmentation procedures that reported a low exposure rate for creos xenoprotect.3

    Together, the results show the efficacy of creos xenoprotect in facilitating bone augmentation and non-inferiority to Bio-Gide® (95% confidence interval).

    These highly relevant findings for dental clinicians, recently published in the peer-reviewed Clinical Oral Implants Research, support creos xenoprotect as a scientific-evidence-based choice for their GBR requirements.

    Hans Geiselhöringer, President, Nobel Biocare said: “For clinicians who want to provide care supported by science, these are very significant findings. The excellent results reported in this clinical trial will give clinicians even greater confidence when choosing creos xenoprotect to treat their patients.

    “At Nobel Biocare we take pride in the wealth of clinical research that demonstrates the high quality of our products and solutions. This is just the latest in a growing body of evidence affirming the efficacy of creos xenoprotect. Guided bone and tissue regeneration makes dental implant treatment a real possibility for even more patients. As this study shows, with creos xenoprotect clinicians can treat more patients better.”

    Read the study: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/clr.12995/abstract

    Get more information about creos xenoprotect, including clinical cases and scientific studies:

    https://www.nobelbiocare.com/international/en/home/products-and-solutions/regenerative-solutions/creos-xenoprotect.html

    References

    1. (1)  Wessing, B.; Urban, I.; Montero, E.; Zechner, W.; Hof, M.; Alandez Chamorro, J.; Alandez Martin, N.; Polizzi, G.; Meloni,

      S.; Sanz, M. Clin Oral Implants Res epub ahead 2016.

    2. (2)  Sanz-Sanchez, I.; Ortiz-Vigon, A.; Sanz-Martin, I.; Figuero, E.; Sanz, M. J Dent Res 2015, 94, S128.

    3. (3)  Wessing, B.; Emmerich, M.; Bozkurt, A. The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry 2016, 36, 179. 

© 2017 AEGIS Communications | Privacy Policy