Comparison of guided bone regeneration using a bovine collagen membrane versus a calcium sulfate barrier

Background. Resorbable membranes have eliminated the need for re-entry for removal and decreased the incidence of adverse soft tissue reactions that accompany membrane exposure. However, the lack of rigidity often makes these more prone to collapse. Calcium sulfate has shown promise as a regenerative material alternative in a socket preservation application. The aim of this study was to clinically compare calcium sulfate (CS) vs. bovine collagen as a membrane in GBR procedures.; Methods. Eighteen sites in 15 patients were treated in this randomized, blinded trial. Edentulous areas had vertical and horizontal ridge measurements made from vacuum formed retainers intra-operatively (prior to grafting and immediately post-grafting) and post-operatively (at time of implant placement) by two blinded examiners. All sites were augmented with approximately equal volumes of autogenous bone and DFDBA composite graft. Nine sites were covered with a bovine collagen membrane (Ossix(TM)) and 9 sites were covered with a CS barrier (CalcigenOral(TM)). All sites were re-entered at 4-6 months. A student t-test was used to analyze the results.; Results. The collagen membrane group had a mean gain in bucco-lingual width of 1.06+/-1.01 mm and occluso-apical height of and 0.19+/-1.11 mm respectively. The changes for the CS group were a mean loss of -0.14+/-0.74 mm and -0.19+/-0.74 mm respectively.; Conclusions. Within the limits of this study, bovine collagen used as a barrier over autogenous bone and DFDBA resulted in a mean gain of 1.06 mm in buccal-lingual width, CS used as a barrier has a mean loss of -0.14 mm. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (p=0.01) for the change in the buccal-lingual dimension.; Key words. Guided bone regeneration; collagen membrane; calcium sulfate; membranes; ridge augmentation...