Choose a Product

  • Geistlich Bio-Oss®

    1-20111

  • Geistlich Fibro-Gide®

    Select Option

BIOBRIEF

The Buccal Pedicle Flap for Peri-Implant Soft Tissue Volume

Dr. Giorgio Tabanella

THE SITUATION

Patient presented with a fistula buccal on tooth #9 associated with a chronic peri-apical lesion and external root resorption. Also tooth #8 showed a chronic peri-apical lesion. Her chief complaint was the misalignment of her teeth. The clinical situation revealed the presence of bleeding upon probing and generalized moderate periodontal disease (Stage II, Grade I) as well as multiple endodontic failures.

THE RISK PROFILE

Low RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk
Patient’s healthIntact immune system Light smokerImpaired immune system 
Patient’s esthetic requirementsLowMediumHigh
Height of smile lineLowMediumHigh
Gingival biotypeThick – “low scalloped”Medium – “medium scalloped”Thin – “high scalloped”
Shape of dental crownsRectangularTriangular
Infection at implant sightNoneChronicAcute
Bone height at adjacent tooth site≤ 5 mm from contact point5.5 – 6.5 mm from contact point≥ 7 mm from contact point
Restorative status of adjacent toothIntactRestored
Width of tooth gap1 tooth (≥ 7 mm)1 tooth (≤ 7 mm)2 teeth or more
Soft-tissue anatomyIntactCompromised
Bone anatomy of the alveolar ridgeNo defectHorizontal defectVertical defect
Note: request for reducing the healing time, long-term maintenance
watch video download pdf

THE APPROACH

The aim of the treatment is to eradicate periodontal disease and restore esthetics and function. Treatment planning: non-surgical and surgical periodontal treatment, orthodontic alignment, extraction of both central incisors, immediate implant placement and Guided Bone Regeneration with Geistlich Bio-Oss®, peri-implant soft tissue boosting with a buccal pedicle flap and full ceramic CAD-CAM restorations.

The clinical picture is showing a fistula buccal to #21 as well as leakage on old composite restorations. A thin biotype is evident.
The sagittal cuts are reporting chronic peri-apical lesions on both central incisors and a thin buccal plate with minor vertical bone loss but fenestration apical to #21.
The intrasurgical picture is showing the bony defect, the buccal fenestration and the thin buccal plate.
After allowing the tissue to heal for 4 months a first “Buccal Pedicle Flap” was performed during the uncovery of the dental implant. Simultaneously, Geistlich Fibro-Gide® was inserted into the envelope created by the flap design.
Geistlich Fibro-Gide® is reduced to a thickness of 4 mm at its borders so that it is easier to get adapted to the recipient site.
The Fibro-Gide® is trimmed so that its borders don’t approach the vertical incisions of the Buccal Pedicle Flap.
Polypropylene 6.0 sutures are used to compressed the Fibro-Gide® underneath the flap thus creating the “wrinkles” on the mucosa.
The wrinkles are visible also on the occlusal view. The mucogingival line is repositioned at its original level.
Four months after immediate implant placement and GBR in area #11 a second Buccal Pedicle Flap is performed to reduce the buccal concavity, boost the peri-implant mucosa and increase the thickness as well as the band of the keratinezed mucosa.
As in the previous surgery the Fibro-Gide® is inserted underneath the Buccal Pedicle Flap and stabilized with e-PTFE 6.0 sutures.
8 weeks post surgery, the occlusal view is showing a biomimetic countouring of the peri-implant mucosa.
The final esthetic result is emphasizing an excellent blending of “white” and “pink” esthetics.

“Orthodontic treatment must be postponed because of the presence of periodontal disease. A thin biotype and a high smile line needs to be taken into consideration.”

THE OUTCOME

The final outcome at 8 weeks is showing pink esthetics as well as biomimetics and function. The use of the buccal pedicle flap allowed the increased volume of the peri-implant mucosa with a minimally invasive approach. The combination of Geistlich Fibro-Gide® and a buccal pedicle flap had the main advantage of reducing the morbidity generally associated with CT harvesting.

The final esthetic result is emphasizing an excellent blending of “white” and “pink” esthetics.

Dr. Giorgio Tabanella

Dr. Tabanella is a Diplomate of the American Board of Periodontology, an Active Member of the Italian Academy of Esthetic Dentistry and author of the book “Retreatment of Failures in Dental Medicine”. He graduated from the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA where he obtained his Certificate in Periodontics as well as a Master of Science in Craniofacial Biology. He is Director of O.R.E.C. – Oral Reconstruction and Education Center (www.tabanellaorec.com), reviewer and author of original articles.

BIOBRIEF

Use of Geistlich Fibro-Gide® for Correction of Maxillary Anterior Soft Tissue Peri-implant Ridge Deficiencies

Dr. Israel Puterman

THE SITUATION

A 27-year-old female with congenitally missing maxillary lateral incisors was referred for implant placement. Following completion of orthodontics, a plan was developed to place dental implants at the #7 and #10 positions. Based on CBCT evaluation, alveolar ridge height and width was deemed sufficient for implant placement. Despite sufficient bone volume, facial ridge volume deficiencies were noted at both edentulous sites, requiring augmentation to allow for optimal esthetics.

THE RISK PROFILE

Low RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk
Patient’s healthIntact immune system Light smokerImpaired immune system 
Patient’s esthetic requirementsLowMediumHigh
Height of smile lineLowMediumHigh
Gingival biotypeThick – “low scalloped”Medium – “medium scalloped”Thin – “high scalloped”
Shape of dental crownsRectangularTriangular
Infection at implant sightNoneChronicAcute
Bone height at adjacent tooth site≤ 5 mm from contact point5.5 – 6.5 mm from contact point≥ 7 mm from contact point
Restorative status of adjacent toothIntactRestored
Width of tooth gap1 tooth (≥ 7 mm)1 tooth (≤ 7 mm)2 teeth or more
Soft-tissue anatomyIntactCompromised
Bone anatomy of the alveolar ridgeNo defectHorizontal defectVertical defect
watch video download pdf

THE APPROACH

The goal of treatment was to replace missing maxillary lateral incisors with dental implants, while providing an esthetic result with predictable and minimally invasive techniques. Employing a surgical guide for implant placement, implants were placed in precise 3-dimentional positions. The use of xenograft biomaterials (Geistlich Fibro-Gide®) allowed for the augmentation of gingival biotype and elimination of the buccal ridge deficiencies while avoiding the harvesting of autogenous tissue.

Pre-surgical, occlusal view, demonstrating buccal ridge concavities at edentulous sites, #7 and #10.
Geistlich Fibro-Gide® collagen matrix is cut and shaped prior to placement into surgical sites.
Immediate post-surgical occlusal view following placement of implants and Geistlich Fibro-Gide® on facial aspects. Implant #7 was provisionalized immediately, however implant #10 did not achieve sufficient stability and a healing abutment was placed.
Immediate post-surgical facial view. One can note the buccal prominences being developed by the presence of Geistlich Fibro-Gide®.
2-month post-surgical view, following provisionalization of implant #10. Buccal convexities at the implant sites are still evident.
8 month view of implant sites at time of torque test, following maturation of gingival emergence. Of note is thick, convex buccal tissue free of any sign of inflammation.
Occlusal view following final restoration, (Dr. Paul Krainson). Natural-appearing buccal gingival convexities remain 1.5 years post-surgery.
Frontal view of final restoration of implants. The tissue health with stippling and root-like gingival prominences are noted.

“A buccal ridge deficiency with congenitally missing lateral incisors in a high-scallop, high-smile young female patient.”

THE OUTCOME

The presented case involves a female patient with congenitally missing maxillary lateral incisors and soft tissue ridge deficiencies. Implants were placed and a volume-stable collagen matrix Geistlich Fibro-Gide® was placed to provide labial soft tissue volume. The tissue emergence was then developed with the use of provisional restorations, one placed at the time of surgery, the other following implant integration. The implants were restored with gingival tissue transformed to mimic convex root emergence.

Correction of labial soft tissue ridge deficiencies at implant sites through use of a Geistlich Fibro-Gide® volume stable, collagen matrix.”

Dr. Israel Puterman

A volume-stable collagen matrix can be used to correct a labial soft tissue deficiency, eliminating the potential negative sequelae of an autogenous connective tissue graft.”

Dr. Israel Puterman

Various materials can be used to restore a soft tissue deficiency; use of a volume-stable collagen matrix provides numerous advantages when used in the proper indication.”

Dr. Israel Puterman

Dr. Israel Puterman

Dr. Puterman, originally from Montreal Canada, received his DMD from Boston University in 2002 and dual graduate certificates in Implant Dentistry and in Periodontics from Loma Linda University in 2008. He is a published author in various journals including the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry and the Journal of Prosthodontics. He practices in the Washington, DC area.

BIOBRIEF

Successful Implant Placement and Horizontal Augmentation for Bilateral Congenitally Missing Maxillary Incisors

Dr. Avinash Bidra

THE SITUATION

A 30-year-old male patient was referred to me with bilateral congenitally missing lateral incisors in the maxilla. The referring general dentist had previously made a resin-bonded bridge which was successful for a few years but had frequent debondings. Clinical examination revealed lack of ridge contour but the CBCT revealed existence of adequate width for placement of narrow-diameter implants with additional bone grafting and contour augmentation. The existing bone anatomy precluded placement of implants for screw-retained restorations without a pre-surgical lateral ridge augmentation procedure. The patient accepted a treatment plan for placement of two narrow-diameter implants and simultaneous bone grafting and contour augmentation followed by restoration with zirconia cement-retained crowns.

THE RISK PROFILE

Low RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk
Patient’s healthIntact immune system Light smokerImpaired immune system 
Patient’s esthetic requirementsLowMediumHigh
Height of smile lineLowMediumHigh
Gingival biotypeThick – “low scalloped”Medium – “medium scalloped”Thin – “high scalloped”
Shape of dental crownsRectangularTriangular
Infection at implant sightNoneChronicAcute
Bone height at adjacent tooth site≤ 5 mm from contact point5.5 – 6.5 mm from contact point≥ 7 mm from contact point
Restorative status of adjacent toothIntactCompromised
Width of tooth gap1 tooth (≥ 7 mm)1 tooth (≤ 7 mm)2 teeth or more
Soft-tissue anatomyIntactCompromised
Bone anatomy of the alveolar ridgeNo defectHorizontal defectVertical defect
watch video download pdf

THE APPROACH

My treatment goals were to preserve the existing soft-tissue architecture, especially the interdental papilla, mesial and distal to the lateral incisors, improve the facial contour at the lateral incisor sites by bone grafting with a low substitution biomaterial, and harmonize esthetics and function with optimal implant-supported restorations.

Frontal view revealed adequate contours of soft-tissue especially in gingival height and presence of interdental papilla which needed to be preserved.
Bilateral papilla-sparing incisions were used to preserve the existing papilla and the osteotomies were prepared to allow implant trajectories for cement retained restorations.
An apical fenestration was noted in the osteotomies. After placement of a narrow diameter implant at patient’s right lateral incisor, the site was grafted with a mixture of autologous bone chips and Geistlich Bio-Oss®.
Geistlich Bio-Gide® is trimmed to match the trapezoidal flap design and placed over the graft material.
Healing Abutments 3.5 mm were placed at time of surgery for single-stage healing
After a 3-month healing period, the implants were osseointegrated and then screw-retained provisional crowns were fabricated over both implants. The soft-tissues showed an excellent response to the bone graft materials.
The soft tissues around the implants show excellent maturation and support especially in the interdental papilla region which was preserved during surgery.
Occlusal view shows adequate restoration of the facial contour around the implant restorations indicating excellent outcome from the contour augmentation procedure.
Frontal close-up view of the implant restorations shows pleasing dental and gingival esthetics.

“The patient had failed resin-bonded bridges with deficient contours for bilateral congenitally missing lateral incisors.”

THE OUTCOME

Single-stage implant placement with bilateral papilla-sparing incision design and simultaneous contour augmentation using a mixture of Geistlich Bio-Oss® autologous bone chips and Geistlich Bio-Gide®.

The low substitution bone graft, combined with a rapidly vascularizing membrane, helped to achieve the biological integration of the biomaterial.”

Dr. Avinash Bidra

The use of Geistlich Bio-Gide® and Geistlich Bio-Oss® mixed with autologous bone can lead to a successful outcome in single-stage implant placement with simultaneous contour augmentation.”

Dr. Avinash Bidra

Dr. Avinash Bidra

Dr. Bidra is a Board Certified Maxillofacial Prosthodontist and Director of the Prosthodontics Residency Program at UCONN School of Dental Medicine. He has extensive surgical experience and maintains a part-time private practice restricted to Implant Surgery and Prosthodontics in Meriden, CT. He has lectured at national and international meetings, as well as published extensively in international scientific journals. He has invented prosthetic components and is a co-inventor of a new implant design.

BIOBRIEF

Phenotype Conversion Using Geistlich Fibro-Gide® for Immediate Implants in the Esthetic Zone

Dr. Robert A. Levine

THE SITUATION

A healthy non-smoking 50-year-old female patient who desires a single tooth solution to replace a non-restorable tooth, #12. A root fracture at the level of the palatal post was diagnosed in a root canaled tooth. Maintaining esthetics of the adjacent teeth is important as they are also restored with single full coverage porcelain crowns. Lastly, treatment time reduction and a minimally invasive surgical technique are desired by the patient for reduced downtime and post-operative morbidity.

THE RISK PROFILE

Low RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk
Patient’s healthIntact immune system Light smokerImpaired immune system 
Patient’s esthetic requirementsLowMediumHigh
Height of smile lineLowMediumHigh
Gingival biotypeThick – “low scalloped”Medium – “medium scalloped”Thin – “high scalloped”
Shape of dental crownsRectangularTriangular
Infection at implant sightNoneChronicAcute
Bone height at adjacent tooth site≤ 5 mm from contact point5.5 – 6.5 mm from contact point≥ 7 mm from contact point
Restorative status of adjacent toothIntactRestored
Width of tooth gap1 tooth (≥ 7 mm)1 tooth (≤ 7 mm)2 teeth or more
Soft-tissue anatomyIntactCompromised
Bone anatomy of the alveolar ridgeNo defectHorizontal defectVertical defect
Patients Esthetic Expectations: Realistic
Facial Bone Wall Phenotype: High Risk (<1mm)
Esthetic Risk Profile (ERP) = Medium (summary of above)
watch video download pdf

THE APPROACH

A minimally invasive surgical removal of tooth #12 with maintenance of the buccal plate and leaving a 3mm buccal gap. The implant will be placed one mm below the level of the intact buccal plate with an anatomically correct surgical guide template to provide for a screw-retained solution. The gap will be filled with Geistlich Bio-Oss Collagen® to maintain the bone buccal to the implant, and a palate free approach utilizing Geistlich Fibro-Gide® for soft tissue thickening to accomplish “phenotype conversion.” The long-term surgical goal is >2-3mm thickness of both hard and soft tissue buccal to the implant.

Pre-operative assessment demonstrates minimal zone and thickness of buccal keratinized gingiva, with a medium periodontal phenotype.
Pre-operative CBCT with virtually planned implant placement. A thin buccal plate (<1mm) is measured. Good apical bone is noted for the placement of a Straumann® 12mmx4.1mm bone level tapered implant.
Minimally invasive removal of #12 using only a buccal approach mini-flap showing an intact buccal plate with immediate placement of the implant (1 mm below the intact buccal wall) in a screw-retained position. A 3mm buccal gap is measured and a 1.5mm palatal gap.
Both the buccal and palatal gaps have been packed with Geistlich Bio-Oss Collagen® hydrated with Gem 21S. It’s my preference to squeeze Geistlich Fbro-Gide® between thumb and forefinger, prior to placement. A dry-carved piece of Geistlich Fibro-Gide® is in position thinned approximately 2mm with beveling laterally and coronally with a new #15 blade.
Geistlich Fibro-Gide® in place facial to the intact buccal wall under a full thickness buccal approach mini-flap. Immediate contour management was completed using an Anatotemp® for a maxillary bicuspid tooth.
Suturing completed using 4-0PTFE and 5 -0 polypropylene non-resorbable sutures. Anticipated short-term 25% post-operative swelling is discussed with the patient.
3 months post-operative appointment showing a well-developed subgingival transition zone created with immediate contour management. A reverse torque test was completed, and the case proceeded to completion.
9 month post-operative view with final screw-retained crown in place. Good interproximal papilla healing is noted with thickening of the buccal periodontal phenotype compared with Fig. #1. (Restorative Therapy: Drew Shulman DMD, MAGD; Philadelphia, PA)

“High esthetic demands were the primary concern with this case. They were addressed with the diagnostic tools of clinical photos, a site specific CBCT to evaluate the buccal wall status, and summing the findings with patient expectations gathered using the Esthetic Risk Assessment (knee-to-knee; eye-to-eye) which is used along with our consent agreement to treatment.”

THE OUTCOME

Minimally invasive surgery for buccal wall maintenance, virtually planning the buccal gap and implant width, using a xenograft in the buccal gap with phenotype conversion using a volume stable collagen matrix in conjuction with immediate contour management, allows for the best chance for papillae fill interproximally and maintenance of the mid-buccal gingival margin long-term.

Virtual planning the implant width for a screw-retained prosthesis based on an intact buccal wall after extraction to allow for a buccal gap of >2mm to be grafted are important keys for esthetic success.”

Dr. Robert A. Levine

The importance of the ‘one-two punch’ of ROUTINE phenotype-conversion using Geistlich Fibro-Gide® in conjunction with bone grafting the >2mm buccal gap with Geistlich Bio-Oss Collagen® provides excellent buccal convex tissue maintenance long-term.”

Dr. Robert A. Levine

Dr. Robert A. Levine

Robert A. Levine DDS is a board-certified periodontist at the Pennsylvania Center for Dental Implants and Periodontics in Philadelphia. He is a Fellow of the International Team for Dental Implantology (ITI), College of Physicians in Philadelphia, International Society of Periodontal Plastic Surgeons and the Academy of Osseointegration. He has post-graduate periodontology and implantology teaching appointments at Temple University in Philadelphia, UNC in Chapel Hill and UIC in Chicago and has over 80 scientific publications.

BIOBRIEF

Guided Tissue Regeneration in the Esthetic Zone of a 34-Year-Old Male

Bassam Kinaia, DDS, MS, DICOI

THE SITUATION

A 34-year-old healthy male presented with increased spacing between maxillary left central and lateral incisors. Clinical examination showed deep probing depths between #9-10 area. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) showed vertical bone loss #9-10 wrapping around the palatal surfaces. Treatment recommendation included guided tissue regeneration (GTR) to stabilize the periodontium.

Area #9-10 was debrided and showed a wide 1-2 wall defect measuring ~7mm vertical bone loss. GTR procedure using Geistlich vallomix™ bone graft (allograft + xenograft) and a collagen membrane were employed and primary closure obtained. Healing at 2 and 4 weeks and 6 months showed proper bone fill with stable periodontium.

THE RISK PROFILE

Low RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk
Patient’s healthIntact immune system Light smokerImpaired immune system 
Patient’s esthetic requirementsLowMediumHigh
Height of smile lineLowMediumHigh
Gingival biotypeThick – “low scalloped”Medium – “medium scalloped”Thin – “high scalloped”
Shape of dental crownsRectangularTriangular
Infection at implant sightNoneChronicAcute
Bone height at adjacent tooth site≤ 5 mm from contact point5.5 – 6.5 mm from contact point≥ 7 mm from contact point
Restorative status of adjacent toothIntactRestored
Width of tooth gap1 tooth (≥ 7 mm)1 tooth (≤ 7 mm)2 teeth or more
Soft-tissue anatomyIntactCompromised
Bone anatomy of the alveolar ridgeNo defectHorizontal defectVertical defect
watch video download pdf

THE APPROACH

Correct the vertical bone loss around #9-10 and save the dentition. Sulcular incisions with a paracrestal incision around #9-10 were performed. The area was debrided showing a wide 1-2 bony wall defect (measuring ~7mm vertical bone loss). Primary closure was obtained using 6-0 prolene sutures.

Initial clinical and radiographic presentation showing vertical bone loss #9-10 area
Initial CBCT presentation showing bone loss between #9-10 wrapping palatally
Occlusal clinical views showing sulcular incision with paracrestal incision #9-10
Facial and occlusal clinical views showing full thickness flap reflection with wide 1-2 bony wall defect measuring ~7mm vertical bone loss
Facial clinical views showing full thickness flap reflection and GTR procedure using Geistlich vallomix™ bone graft (allograft as an internal first layer and xenograft as an outside second layer) and collagen membrane
Facial and occlusal clinical views showing primary closure using 6-0 prolene sutures with immediate post-surgical bone addition
Facial and occlusal clinical views showing healing at 10 days with tissue granulating in
Facial and occlusal clinical views showing healing at 6 weeks
Pre-operative vs post-surgical clinical and radiographic views showing adequate bone fill and reduction in probing depths

“Guided tissue regeneration is indicated to correct the vertical bone loss around the #9-10 area and stabilize the periodontium.”

THE OUTCOME

The use of a minimally invasive surgical GTR approach showed excellent radiographic bone fill and reduction in probing depths from 8mm to 3mm at 6 months follow-up. Treatment outcome revealed stable periodontium and the patient was happy with the healthy stable teeth.

6 months follow-up

Guided tissue regeneration using Geistlich vallomix™ bone graft (allograft as an internal first layer and xenograft as an outside second layer) and collagen membrane showed predictable periodontal regeneration.”

Dr. Bassam Kinaia

Understanding the biology of Geistlich vallomix™ to layer the allograft first (internally for better osteogenic potential) and xenograft second (externally due to slower resorption rate) allowed better space maintenance and predictable regeneration.”

Dr. Bassam Kinaia

Bassam Kinaia, DDS, MS, DICOI

Dr. Kinaia is the Associate Director of the Graduate Periodontology Program at the University of Detroit Mercy (UDM). He is also the former Director of the Periodontology Program at UDM in Michigan and Boston University Institute for Dental Research and Education in Dubai. He is a Diplomate of the American Acade- my of Periodontology (AAP) and International Congress of Oral Implantology (ICOI). He received a certificate of Excellence from the AAP in recognition of teaching-research fellowship.

BIOBRIEF

Geistlich Mucograft® for the Treatment of Multiple Adjacent Recession Defects:  A More “Palatable” Option

Dr. Daniel Gober

THE SITUATION

A 35-year-old male presented in my practice with a chief complaint of recession. Multiple buccal recession defects ranging 2-5 mm were noted by teeth #11-14 with a minimal amount of keratinized tissue on the buccal of #14. Bone levels were within normal limits with no loss of interproximal tissue observed. These recession defects are classified as Miller Class I recession defects. Typically, 100% root coverage is expected for recession defects of this type.

THE RISK PROFILE

Low RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk
Patient’s healthIntact immune systemLight smokerImpaired immune system 
Patient’s esthetic requirementsLowMediumHigh
Height of smile lineLowMediumHigh
Gingival biotypeThick – “low scalloped”Medium – “medium scalloped”Thin – “high scalloped”
Bone defect(s)Not presentSlight defect <2mmSignificant >3mm
Keratinized tissueAdequate 5mmInadequate <5mmInadequate <3mm
Miller classificationClass I-IIClass IIIClass IV
watch video download pdf

THE APPROACH

My treatment goals included completing root coverage of the recession defects and augmentation of the width of attached keratinized tissue by tooth #14. My patient had similar recession defects on teeth #3-6 which were previously treated with an autogenous sub-epithelial connective tissue graft. Instead of autogenous tissue grafting, Geistlich Mucograft®, a xenogenic collagen matrix, was used in conjunction with a coronally advanced flap.

Pre-operative view of recession defects that ranges from 2-5 mm. There is minimal keratinized tissue on #14. Pocket depths are within limits with no loss of interproximal tissue.
A 15c blade is used to make sulcular incisions with scooping incisions at the level of the CEJ. A combination flap consisting of full-thickness coronally followed by a partial-thickness dissection apically is reflected.
The papillary tissue is de-epithelialized with a football diamond bur on a rotary hand piece. This exposes a vascular bed for the graft and intended coronal positioning of the flap.
Side-view of the recession defects. It is clearly visible how deep the recession defects are.
Geistlich Mucograft® is trimmed and positioned to extend beyond the root surfaces. A combination of simple interrupted sutures at its coronal edge and mattress sutures extending over the entire graft are used to adapt the graft to the recipient site.
The flap is then advanced and coronally positioned with horizontal mattress sutures to release tension and simple interrupted sutures to approximate the flap edges to the de-epithelialized papillas.
Follow-up after 1 week: note that the flap margins appear stable. Erythema and edema evident with maturation of the tissue beginning.
Follow-up after 3 months: maturation of the tissue evident with complete root coverage. An increase in the zone of keratinized tissue by #14 is also visible.
Follow-up after 1 year: stability of the graft is evident, complete coverage and a healthy and maintainable gingival situation have been achieved.

“The patient was unhappy with the post-operative morbidity he
experienced as a result of the previous connective tissue graft.”

THE OUTCOME

This case illustrates the successful use of Geistlich Mucograft®, a xenogenic collagen matrix, for the treatment of multiple adjacent recession defects. Complete root coverage and an increase in the zone of keratinized tissue was obtained and a dento-gingival complex that is amenable to long-term health and stability was achieved. My patient was spared from the inevitable morbidities associated with a sub-epithelial connective tissue graft from a palatal donor site.

Follow-up after 1 year

Geistlich Mucograft® is a viable alternative to an autogenous tissue graft for the treatment of recession defects.”

Dr. Daniel Gober

Having a thorough knowledge of wound healing can make all of the difference. Every step of the procedure must be planned with the goal of maximizing vascularization of the graft matrix.”

Dr. Daniel Gober

Due to its ability to smoothly and meticulously guide small suture needles through soft-tissue, the castroviejo needle holder is my instrument of choice when suturing during periodontal plastic procedures.”

Dr. Daniel Gober

Dr. Daniel Gober

Dr. Daniel D. Gober received his DDS from SUNY Stony Brook School of Dental Medicine in 2010. He completed his residency in periodontics and implantology at Nova Southeastern University. Dr. Gober is board certified by the American Academy of Periodontology and is a Diplomate of the International Congress of Oral Implantology. He is also certified in the administration of IV sedation and specializes in soft-tissue procedures around both natural teeth and implants. He currently practices in Cedarhurst, NY at South Island Periodontics & Implantology, PLLC.

BIOBRIEF

Soft-Tissue Augmentation in the Esthetic Zone

Prof. Dr. Daniel S. Thoma

THE SITUATION

A young male patient was referred to the clinic with a missing central incisor, #9 following trauma. An implant was placed and the patient was referred for an implant-born reconstruction. The patient does not smoke and drinks occasionally. Upon a clinical examination, extensive horizontal and vertical contour deficiencies are present prior to abutment connection.

THE RISK PROFILE

Low RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk
Patient’s healthIntact immune system Light smokerImpaired immune system 
Patient’s esthetic requirementsLowMediumHigh
Height of smile lineLowMediumHigh
Gingival biotypeThick – “low scalloped”Medium – “medium scalloped”Thin – “high scalloped”
Shape of dental crownsRectangularTriangular
Infection at implant sightNoneChronicAcute
Bone height at adjacent tooth site≤ 5 mm from contact point5.5 – 6.5 mm from contact point≥ 7 mm from contact point
Restorative status of adjacent toothIntactRestored
Width of tooth gap1 tooth (≥ 7 mm)1 tooth (≤ 7 mm)2 teeth or more
Soft-tissue anatomyIntactCompromised
Bone anatomy of the alveolar ridgeNo defectHorizontal defectVertical defect
Note: The fractured tooth has a periapical lesion together with a severe bone defect around the horizontal fracture.
watch video download pdf

THE APPROACH

The compromized situation with a horizontal and vertical hard and soft-tissue deficit required a soft-tissue volume grafting procedure. A buccal split-thickness flap was prepared and Geistlich Fibro-Gide® shaped and placed. Primary wound closure was obtained. Abutment connection was performed after 8 weeks and the emergence profile created with a provisional reconstruction. The final reconstruction was placed at 3 months.

A young male patient was referred to the clinic with a missing central incisor, #9 following trauma.
Preparation of a split-thickness flap (buccal pouch).
Due to releasing incisions within the periosteum, the tissues can be advanced more coronally.
The dimension and shape of Geistlich Fibro-Gide® with a maximal thickness (5mm) at the transition between the buccal and occlusal aspect.
Geistlich Fibro-Gide® inserted and immobilized with a horizontal cross-suture to the palatal flap.
Primary wound closure.
A provisional reconstruction is inserted; blanching of the tissues can be observed.
Final emergence profile established with a provisional reconstruction.
8 weeks healing: Abutment connection is performed
The clinical situation at 1-year follow-up.

“The patient presented with severe horizontal and vertical hard and soft-tissue defects. I needed a solution that could increase the soft-tissue anatomy around the implant and prosthesis.”

THE OUTCOME

The outcome of the case was very pleasing having fulfilled the patient’s expectations in terms of esthetics and function. The tissues are healthy and volume was obtained through the grafting procedure to match the contour of the neighboring natural tooth.

Soft-tissue augmentation using Geistlich Fibro-Gide® results in a predictable volume gain and reduces surgery time, as well as patient discomfort.”

Dr. Daniel S. Thoma

Prof. Dr. Daniel S. Thoma

Prof. Dr. Daniel Thoma is the head of Reconstructive dentistry and Vice-chairman at the Clinic for Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Material Sciences, University of Zurich, Switzerland. He graduated in 2000 at the University of Basel, Switzerland and was trained in implant dentistry and prosthodontics at the clinic for Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics and dental Material Sciences, University of Zurich, Switzerland.

BIOBRIEF

Horizontal Ridge Augmentation in the Posterior Mandible of a 90-Year-Old Female

Dr. Kim Rocky Mount Perio
Dr. John Kim

THE SITUATION

A 90-year-old female presented requesting dental implants be placed in the left mandibular posterior region. Her chief complaint was increased drooling and difficulty chewing on only one side. She lost her bridge one year prior to her visit and firmly stated that she did not want to wear a partial denture. The clinical exam and CBCT showed that there was a horizontal alveolar ridge deficiency that precluded the implants from being placed in a restoratively desirably position. Therefore, a horizontal ridge augmentation was done using multiple layers of Geistlich Bio-Gide® Compressed over a 1:1 ratio of autogenous bone and Geistlich Bio-Oss® xenograft.

THE RISK PROFILE

Low RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk
Patient’s healthIntact immune system Light smokerImpaired immune system 
Patient’s esthetic requirementsLowMediumHigh
Height of smile lineLowMediumHigh
Gingival biotypeThick – “low scalloped”Medium – “medium scalloped”Thin – “high scalloped”
Shape of dental crownsRectangularTriangular
Infection at implant sightNoneChronicAcute
Bone height at adjacent tooth site≤ 5 mm from contact point5.5 – 6.5 mm from contact point≥ 7 mm from contact point
Restorative status of adjacent toothIntactRestored
Width of tooth gap1 tooth (≥ 7 mm)1 tooth (≤ 7 mm)2 teeth or more
Soft-tissue anatomyIntactCompromised
Bone anatomy of the alveolar ridgeNo defectHorizontal defectVertical defect
Note: Very limited range of opening
watch video download pdf

THE APPROACH

The treatment goal was to gain adequate horizontal bone dimension to allow for prosthetically-driven implant placement. Guided bone regeneration was performed in which autogenous bone was mixed with Geistlich Bio-Oss® xenograft in a 1:1 ratio. PRF was used to create “sticky bone” and was covered by multiple layers of Geistlich Bio-Gide® Compressed. The membrane was stabilized with periosteal biting stabilizing sutures. Tension-free primary closure was achieved and the grafted site was allowed to heal for 8 months prior to the implant surgery for #19 and #20.

Pre-operative situation showing the horizontal ridge deficiency (left). Buccal bone concavity evident after full thickness flap elevation (middle). There is insufficient bone to place implants in an ideal restorative position (right).
It is important to locate the mental foramen. Intramarrow penetrations were done to allow for improved blood supply to the bone graft.
The clinical cocktail used for guided bone regeneration: 1) 50/50 mixture of autogenous bone chips, collected with Geistlich SafeScraper TWIST, and Geistlich Bio-Oss®, and 2) Geistlich Bio-Gide® Compressed 20 x 30 mm and 13 x 25 mm.
“Sticky bone”, created by combining PRF with the bone graft, adapted well to the site of the defect. Periosteal biting sutures were used for stabilization of the multiple layers of Geistlich Bio-Gide® Compressed and underlying bone graft.
Geistlich Bio-Gide® Compressed was carefully trimmed to be mindful of the mental nerve.
Tension-free primary closure achieved with horizontal mattress sutures and simple interrupted sutures.
Re-entry and CBCT scan at 8 months showing a significant increase in horizonal bone dimension.
Sufficient regenerated bone to allow for implant therapy (left). Implants #19 and #20 placed. Vital bone from guided bone regeneration as evidenced by the bleeding bone (middle). Tension-free primary closure achieved using 5-0 glycolon sutures.

“A predictable ridge augmentation procedure was needed to help our 90-year-old patient avoid having nutritional deficiencies due to lack of proper chewing ability and also to improve her quality of life.”

THE OUTCOME

The horizontal ridge augmentation procedure resulted in adequate bone for implant therapy as evidenced by the CBCT scan and re-entry surgery. With a sufficient quantity of good quality regenerated bone, implants for #19 and #20 were placed using a surgical guide based on a diagnostic wax up. Our 90-year-old patient is very happy to be able to chew efficiently again.

Stabilizing Geistlich Bio-Gide® Compressed and the underlying particulate graft allows for predictable ridge augmentation across multiple edentulous sites.”

Dr. John Kim
Dr. Kim Rocky Mount Perio

Dr. John Kim

Dr. Kim, originally from Fairfax, VA, received his DMD from Harvard School of Dental Medicine. He completed his residency and received his M.S. in Periodontics at UNC School of Dentistry at Chapel Hill. Dr. Kim is a Diplomate of the American Board of Periodontology and actively speaks as an expert on guided bone regeneration, implant therapy, soft tissue grafting, and managing complications domestically and internationally. He is also an adjunct faculty at UNC Adams School of Dentistry.

BIOBRIEF

Horizontal Ridge Augmentation in the Esthetic Zone

Dr. Justin Kang

THE SITUATION

An adult female patient presented with a long history of edentulism at site #9. Patient was interested in replacing her missing tooth with a dental implant, and was wearing a Nesbit appliance. The irritation from the ill-fitting Nesbit appliance resulted in irregular and friable soft-tissue at site #9.

Pre-operative CBCT demonstrated a hard-tissue concavity apical to the crest of the bone. The primary goal of therapy was to regain horizontal dimension of hard and soft-tissue to achieve prosthetically-driven placement of a dental implant to replace the patient‘s left central incisor.

THE RISK PROFILE

Low RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk
Patient’s healthIntact immune system Light smokerImpaired immune system 
Patient’s esthetic requirementsLowMediumHigh
Height of smile lineLowMediumHigh
Gingival biotypeThick – “low scalloped”Medium – “medium scalloped”Thin – “high scalloped”
Shape of dental crownsRectangularTriangular
Infection at implant sightNoneChronicAcute
Bone height at adjacent tooth site≤ 5 mm from contact point5.5 – 6.5 mm from contact point≥ 7 mm from contact point
Restorative status of adjacent toothIntactRestored
Width of tooth gap1 tooth (≥ 7 mm)1 tooth (≤ 7 mm)2 teeth or more
Soft-tissue anatomyIntactCompromised
Bone anatomy of the alveolar ridgeNo defectHorizontal defectVertical defect
Note: Lack of mutually protected occlusion on the patient‘s left side due to wear from parafunctional habit.
watch video download pdf

THE APPROACH

The treatment goal was to regain the horizontal dimension of hard and soft-tissue through guided bone regeneration. In coordination with the restoring dentist, a diagnostic wax up was completed to determine the ideal tooth position and to regain mutually protected occlusion on the patient’s left side. The combination of Geistlich Bio-Oss® and autologous bone chips was used along with Geistlich Bio-Gide® to regenerate the horizontal dimension for prosthetically-driven implant placement.

Baseline: compromised soft-tissue architecture at site #9 due to ill-fitting Nesbit appliance.
Sulcular and paracrestal incision for full thickness flap elevation with single vertical incision distal to the site.
Presence of horizontal tissue deficiency clearly visible following flap elevation.
Application of 50:50 mixture of Geistlich Bio-Oss® and autologous bone chips harvested using Geistlich SafeScraper Twist.
Geistlich Bio-Gide® stabilized using fixation pins and covering the graft material.
Tension-free primary closure achieved using 4-0 PTFE sutures.
Soft-tissue contour at 4-month healing. Fixed provisional in place for soft-tissue contouring.
Occlusal view demonstrating gain in horizontal dimension for prosthetically guided implant placement.

“Patient with a long history of partial edentulism was seeking a long-term, predictable restorative option to replace her missing left central incisor.”

THE OUTCOME

Adequate hard and soft-tissue architecture was restored with the use of Geistlich Bio-Oss® and Geistlich Bio-Gide® for predictable, prosthetically-driven implant placement. The combination of Geistlich Bio-Oss® and autologous bone chips provides the best chance for regeneration while maintaining the hard and soft-tissue contours.

Decortication allows for improved blood supply and nutrients to the bone graft.”

Dr. Justin Kang

This case demonstrates the importance of meticulous incision design, flap advancement, and suturing technique to ensure adequate blood supply and nutrients to the graft material and to maintain primary closure throughout the course of healing.”

Dr. Justin Kang

The combination of Geistlich Bio-Oss® and autologous bone chips provides the best chance for regeneration while maintaining the hard and soft-tissue contours.”

Dr. Justin Kang

Dr. Justin Kang

Dr. Justin Kang received his Doctor of Dental Medicine degree from University of Pennsylvania School of Dental Medicine. He completed his residency and received his Masters of Science in Periodontics at Columbia University College of Dental Medicine. Dr. Kang is a Diplomate of the American Board of Periodontology and a member of numerous professional associations including the Academy of Osseointegration, American Dental Association and the New Jersey Dental Association.

BIOBRIEF

Root Coverage for Multiple Adjacent Teeth in the Maxilla with Geistlich Fibro-Gide® 1.5-Year Follow-Up

Dr. Vinay Bhide

THE SITUATION

The patient is a healthy, 60-year-old female who presented to our clinic with a chief complaint of progressive gum recession which had led to compromised esthetics and sensitivity involving the maxillary left lateral incisor (#10), canine (#11), and first bicuspid (#12) teeth. The teeth in question had 3-4 mm of gingival recession on the buccal surface with a sufficient zone of keratinized gingiva. These teeth also had obvious cervical abrasion.

THE RISK PROFILE

Low RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk
Patient’s healthIntact immune system Light smokerImpaired immune system 
Patient’s esthetic requirementsLowMediumHigh
Height of smile lineLowMediumHigh
Gingival biotypeThick – “low scalloped”Medium – “medium scalloped”Thin – “high scalloped”
Shape of dental crownsRectangularTriangular
Infection at implant sightNoneChronicAcute
Bone height at adjacent tooth site≤ 5 mm from contact point5.5 – 6.5 mm from contact point≥ 7 mm from contact point
Restorative status of adjacent toothIntactRestored
Width of tooth gap1 tooth (≥ 7 mm)1 tooth (≤ 7 mm)2 teeth or more
Soft-tissue anatomyIntactCompromised
Bone anatomy of the alveolar ridgeNo defectHorizontal defectVertical defect
Classification of recession – RT1 i.e. intact interdental bone and soft tissues
Severity of recession – mild to moderate
Amount of keratinized gingiva – 2 mm or greater for all teeth involved
watch video download pdf

THE APPROACH

Treatment goals for this case were to obtain complete root coverage, increase soft tissue thickness, and reduce/eliminate cervical sensitivity. A split-thickness envelope flap approach was used. Geistlich Fibro-Gide® was then trimmed, hydrated with saline, and placed over the exposed root surfaces. The flap was coronally advanced in a tension-free manner to completely cover the biomaterial and exposed root surfaces.

Pre-operative condition: Note that the gingival recession of 3-4 mm is evident as is the cervical root abrasions. The interdental papillae completely fills the embrasure space.
Incision design showing the sulcular incisions with horizontal incisions across the interdental regions ending with a remote oblique vertical releasing incision distal to the first bicuspid tooth.
The interdental papillae were de-epithelialized and Geistlich Fibro-Gide®was placed over the exposed roots extending onto the bone. Geistlich Fibro-Gide® was not secured with sutures.
Internal periosteal releasing incision was made to allow tension-free coronal advancement of the buccal flap to completely cover Geistlich Fibro-Gide®.The flap was secured with 5-0 Monocryl® sutures.
1-week post-operative visit: the healing looks good and sutures are intact. There was a small soft-tissue dehiscence at the buccal margin of the canine tooth.
Healing progressed well at 2 months post-operatively and the dehiscence defect seen at 1 week appears to be healing. Soft-tissue thickness is also evident at this stage.
At 6 months, 100% root coverage has been achieved. Note the increase in keratinized gingiva at the canine tooth where there was previously delayed healing. The patient is happy with the esthetic and functional outcome.
At 1 year, we can see root coverage has been sustained. Complete root coverage is not seen for the upper left bicuspid, not surprising given the tooth had an older restoration which was removed prior to grafting and the CEJ on the proximal surface is visible. Partial coverage was achieved however and is much more pleasing to the patient.
At 1.5 years, the tissue looks stable, healthy and esthetic. The patient is very happy with results thus far both from esthetic and functional standpoints. She is still free of sensitivity.

“The patient’s main priorities were to improve esthetics and reduce/eliminate root sensitivity. Soft tissue grafting was done with autologous connective tissue in other areas of her mouth many years ago and she was hesitant to undergo surgery again if it involved harvesting tissue from her palate due to the post-operative pain she experienced after these previous procedures.”

THE OUTCOME

This case nicely shows that the result following root coverage surgery to treat multiple adjacent teeth using a volume-stable collagen matrix is comparable to that seen with autologous connective tissue. At 1.5 years, there is continued stability of the treated site. The tissue appears healthy and firm. The patient‘s chief complaints of esthetics and sensitivity have been addressed and the patient is maintaining excellent oral hygiene and home care.

Multiple recessions on adjacent teeth in the maxilla can be treated successfully with a volume-stable collagen matrix and coronally-advanced flap.”

Dr. Vinay Bhide

The most important material for this case is the use of a volume-stable collagen matrix used in place of autologous connective tissue. Using this material has significantly decreased patient morbidity.”

Dr. Vinay Bhide

Dr. Vinay Bhide

Dr. Vinay Bhide is a board certified Periodontist with a special interest in periodontal plastics and reconstructive surgical procedures. Dr. Bhide did his dental and specialty training at the university of Toronto. In addition to private practice, Dr. Bhide is a clinical instructor in the Department of Periodontics at the university of Toronto. He is also a staff periodontist in the Center for Advanced Dental Care and Research at Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto.

BIOBRIEF

Lateral Ridge Augmentation in the Posterior Mandible

Dr. John M. Sisto

THE SITUATION

A 70-year-old female in good health presented with a fracture of tooth #19 which is the distal abutment for a four-unit bridge tooth #19-22, with pontics in the #20 and #21 positions. With the loss of the bridge, the patient desired a fixed prosthetic replacement. A bridge from tooth #22 to an implant placed at the #18 position was not deemed mechanically sound. She opted for implant placement at positions #19, #20 and #21 following lateral ridge augmentation with autogenous bone and Geistlich Bio-Oss® contained with a Geistlich Bio-Gide® membrane.

THE RISK PROFILE

Low RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk
Patient’s healthIntact immune system Light smokerImpaired immune system 
Patient’s esthetic requirementsLowMediumHigh
Height of smile lineLowMediumHigh
Gingival biotypeThick – “low scalloped”Medium – “medium scalloped”Thin – “high scalloped”
Shape of dental crownsRectangularTriangular
Infection at implant sightNoneChronicAcute
Bone height at adjacent tooth site≤ 5 mm from contact point5.5 – 6.5 mm from contact point≥ 7 mm from contact point
Restorative status of adjacent toothIntactCompromised
Width of tooth gap1 tooth (≥ 7 mm)1 tooth (≤ 7 mm)2 teeth or more
Soft-tissue anatomyIntactCompromised
Bone anatomy of the alveolar ridgeNo defectHorizontal defectVertical defect
watch video download pdf

THE APPROACH

A subperiosteal flap with a mid-ridge incision was performed with anterior and posterior releasing incisions which were placed the distance of one tooth mesial and one tooth distal from the graft site. The posterior releasing incision allowed for exposure of the ramus for harvesting of the autologous bone. The grafted site was allowed to heal for a period of 8 months at which time the implants were placed. Abutment connection occurred 4 months following implant placement.

CT scan showing insufficient bone width for implant placement < 4mm.
Initial incisions on the midcrest of the ridge were performed for full-thickness flap preparation.
Four mucoperiosteal flaps were done with vertical releasing incisions and interosseous holes created to stimulate bone formation (RAP phenomenon).
Harvesting of the autologous cortical bone from the lateral surface of the ramus, utilizing the Geistlich Micross.
Geistlich Bio-Oss® granules mixed with harvested autologous bone chips.
Geistlich Bio-Oss® and autologous bone mixture was placed and covered with Geistlich Bio-Gide®. Pins and screws were utilized for fixation to provide primary stability.
Re-entry 8 months post-grafting: sufficient bone has been regenerated to place implants in the desired positions.
Follow-up at the time of implant uncovering and placement of the healing abutments, (4 months post- implant placement). All implants were successfully reverse torqued at 20ncm.
At re-entry eight months post-grafting, the width of the bone had increased significantly and measured 7.46mm at position #21.

“A bone graft was required to augment the ridge, a CBCT scan was performed prior to surgery to determine bone volume and the amount of bone required to graft.”

THE OUTCOME

Following 8 months of healing, the augmented site showed sufficient bone width that was assessed with a CT scan. After examination, it was determined that the bone width was adequate for implant placement in the desired position to allow an esthetically pleasing and functional outcome for the patient.

The use of Geistlich Bio-Oss® in combination with autogenous bone provides an excellent recipient site for the placement of dental implants and long-term maintenance of bone volume for implant survival.”

Dr. John M. Sisto

The Geistlich Micross is essential in harvesting bone from the lateral ramus in an efficient and stress-free manner.”

Dr. John M. Sisto

Dr. John M. Sisto

Dr. John M. Sisto received his Doctorate in Dental Surgery degree from Loyola University and completed his residency and certification in Oral and Maxilofacial Surgery at the Cook County Hospital in Chicago. Dr. Sisto was the Director of Residency Education at Cook County Hospital from 1985 to 2010 and started the residency program in oral and maxillofacial surgery in 1990. He held teaching positions at both Northwestern and University of Illinois Dental schools as a clinical assistant professor, and also at Northwestern Medical School. He was the Division Chief of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery at Cook County Hospital and Chairman of Dentistry at Resurrection Medical Center. Dr. Sisto has published papers on dental implant surgery, trauma surgery, orthognathic surgery and maxillofacial infections. He has lectured both locally and nationally at various educational forums.

BIOBRIEF

Bone Augmentation L-Shape Technique with Early Implant Placement

Prof. Dr. Ronald E. Jung

THE SITUATION

The patient presented to the clinic with a discolored tooth #8, with mobility and a history of trauma. The tooth has a horizontal fracture in the apical third of the root and has recurrent infection after the root canal treatment. The patient feels discomfort and dislikes his esthetic appearance. He would like the fractured tooth #8 removed and replaced with a fixed solution.

THE RISK PROFILE

Low RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk
Patient’s healthIntact immune system Light smokerImpaired immune system 
Patient’s esthetic requirementsLowMediumHigh
Height of smile lineLowMediumHigh
Gingival biotypeThick – “low scalloped”Medium – “medium scalloped”Thin – “high scalloped”
Shape of dental crownsRectangularTriangular
Infection at implant sightNoneChronicAcute
Bone height at adjacent tooth site≤ 5 mm from contact point5.5 – 6.5 mm from contact point≥ 7 mm from contact point
Restorative status of adjacent toothIntactRestored
Width of tooth gap1 tooth (≥ 7 mm)1 tooth (≤ 7 mm)2 teeth or more
Soft-tissue anatomyIntactCompromised
Bone anatomy of the alveolar ridgeNo defectHorizontal defectVertical defect
Note: The fractured tooth has a periapical lesion together with a severe bone defect around the horizontal fracture.
watch video download pdf

THE APPROACH

To carefully extract tooth #8 and to replace it with an early-stage implant placed with simultaneous guided bone regeneration through the use of Geistlich Bio-Oss Collagen® trimmed in an “L-Shape” under the protection of a Geistlich Bio-Gide® membrane. To augment the peri-implant soft-tissue with the use of a connective tissue graft during implant healing time, increasing the overall volume of site #8. To provisionalize the implant for the development of a proper emergence profile. To deliver a definitive reconstruction which is functional and esthetic for the patient.

The patient presented to the clinic with a discolored tooth #8, with mobility and a history of trauma. The tooth has a horizontal fracture in the apical third of the root and has recurrent infection after the root canal treatment.
The tooth has had root canal treatment, has a horizontal root fracture in the apical third and exhibits with a periapical lesion.
The tooth is carefully extracted and the socket is left to heal through unassisted healing.
After 6 weeks a full thickness flap is elevated with a distal releasing vertical incision. A bone level implant is placed according to the prosthetic plan through a surgical guide. Notice the buccal dehiscence.
Geistlich Bio-Oss Collagen® is trimmed to an “L-Shape” and is placed on the buccal-occlusal side of the implant. Additional Geistlich Bio-Oss® granules are placed around the remaining gaps.
To stabilize the grafted area the bone augmentation is covered with Geistlich Bio-Gide®, which is fixated apically with two resorbable pins.
The flap is sutured with horizontal mattress and single interrupted sutures and primary closure is achieved.
Four months after implant placement, a limited access “U”-flap was created and an implant impression was taken. The tissue was rolled to the buccal side and the abutment connection was performed.
The definitive layered zirconia crown was fabricated and placed. The clinical situation 5 months after implant placement, shows harmonious soft tissue and a well-integrated implant crown. The patient is satisfied with the esthetic result.
The periapical radiograph taken at the one-year follow-up shows stable marginal bone levels.

“A fractured anterior tooth needs to be replaced with an implant-supported reconstruction.”

THE OUTCOME

The implant and its prosthetic reconstruction were successful because they provided the patient with a fixed solution with adequate function and esthetics. The implant shows stable marginal bone levels due to the proper implant placement together with the guided bone regeneration procedure. The peri-implant soft-tissue is healthy and stable with sufficient volume created by the soft-tissue augmentation. The definitive reconstruction meets the patient’s esthetic demands and is functional in occlusion.

By using Geistlich Bio-Oss Collagen® trimmed into an “L-Shape” covered with Geistlich Bio-Gide® a very stable horizontal and vertical bone volume around the implant is provided. This results in a stable hard and soft-tissue condition following healing. This is key for the long-term performance of an implant especially in the esthetic zone.”

Prof. Dr. Ronald Jung

Four months after implant placement a limited access “U”-flap was created and an implant impression was taken. The tissue was rolled to the buccal side and the abutment connection was performed.”

Prof. Dr. Ronald Jung

Primary stability of the augmented bone volume is the clinical challenge in guided bone regeneration after flap closure. In this case Geistlich Bio-Oss Collagen® has been used to augment on the buccal side of the implant.”

Prof. Dr. Ronald Jung

Prof. Dr. Ronald E. Jung

Prof. Dr. Jung is currently Head of the Division of Implantology, Clinic for Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Material Science, Center of Dental Medicine at the University of Zürich. In 2006 he worked as Visiting Associate Professor at the Department of Periodontics at the University of Texas Heath Science center at San Antonio, USA (Chairman: Prof. D. Cochran). In 2008 he finalized his “Habilitation” (venia legendi) in dental medicine and was appointed associate professor at the University of Zürich. In 2011 he received his PhD degree from the University of Amsterdam, ACTA dental school, The Netherlands. He is an accomplished and internationally renowned lecturer and researcher, best known for his work in the field of hard- and soft-tissue management and his research on new technologies in implant dentistry.

BIOBRIEF

Ridge Augmentation and Delayed Implant Placement on an Upper Lateral Incisor

Dr. Daniele Cardaropoli

THE SITUATION

An adult female patient presented with an endodontic/prosthetic failure on the maxillary left lateral incisor. The patient‘s request was to have a definitive implant-supported single crown. The clinical situation revealed recession of the free gingival margin, while the CBCT evaluation showed the missing buccal bone plate, which contra-indicated an immediate implant placement. The treatment plan included a staged approach with a ridge augmentation procedure at the time of tooth extraction, in order to recreate the buccal bone plate and reduce the gingival recession. By moving the free gingival margin, keratinized tissue was gained through an open-healing approach.

THE RISK PROFILE

Low RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk
Patient’s healthIntact immune system
Non-smoker 
Light smokerImpaired immune system 
Patient’s esthetic requirementsLowMediumHigh
Height of smile lineLowMediumHigh
Gingival biotypeThick – “low scalloped”Medium – “medium scalloped”Thin – “high scalloped”
Shape of dental crownsRectangularTriangular
Infection at implant sightNoneChronicAcute
Bone height at adjacent tooth site≤ 5 mm from contact point5.5 – 6.5 mm from contact point≥ 7 mm from contact point
Restorative status of adjacent toothIntactRestored
Width of tooth gap1 tooth (≥ 7 mm)1 tooth (≤ 7 mm)2 teeth or more
Soft-tissue anatomyIntactCompromised
Bone anatomy of the alveolar ridgeNo defectHorizontal defectVertical defect
Note: The compromised soft-tissue created a high risk situation for esthetic failure and the need for a staged approach, in order to coronalize the free gingival margin.
watch video download pdf

THE APPROACH

The treatment goals were to improve the soft-tissue levels and regenerate the buccal bone plate. After performing a flapless extraction procedure, a specifically designed resorbable bilayer collagen membrane, Geistlich Bio-Gide® Shape, was inserted into the socket with the long wing in contact with the buccal surface and the smooth, compact upper layer facing outward. The alveolus was then grafted with Geistlich Bio-Oss Collagen®. The three smaller wings of the membrane were folded on top of the graft material and sutured to the surrounding soft-tissue, allowing for open-healing.

Baseline: endodontic/prosthetic failure on the maxillary left lateral incisor.
The cone beam image shows the missing bony buccal plate.
Clinical situation following a minimally invasive, flapless extraction approach.
Geistlich Bio-Gide® Shape is inserted into the socket, with the long wing in contact with the buccal surface in order to recreate the cortical bone.
The socket is carefully grafted with Geistlich Bio-Oss Collagen®.
The three remaining wings of Geistlich Bio-Gide® Shape are folded over the bone graft and gently secured inside the gingival sulcus. The membrane is then sutured to the surrounding soft-tissue with six single-interrupted sutures.
Implant placement can be planned 4 months after the ridge augmentation procedure.
4 weeks post-operative view with an open-healing approach, showing a positive soft-tissue response.
After flap elevation at 4 months, the new buccal bone plate can be detected, together with a completely filled alveolus. An implant can now be easily inserted into a fully healed ridge.
Clinical image of the final ceramic crown. An esthetic improvement can be noted when compared with the baseline image. The free gingival margin has been shifted in a coronal direction.

“The patient had a failing crown with compromised soft tissue and requested a single crown rehabilitation with improved esthetics.”

THE OUTCOME

This case demonstrates how it is possible to improve the clinical and esthetic situation that was presented at baseline. Despite missing the buccal bone plate and the recession of the free gingival margin, the ridge augmentation procedure performed with the combination of Geistlich Bio-Gide® Shape and Geistlich Bio-Oss Collagen® was able to create a positive volume of the ridge, allowing for a prosthetically guided implant placement.

Clinical image of the final ceramic crown

Ridge augmentation combining the use of Geistlich Bio-Oss Collagen® and Geistlich Bio-Gide® Shape is a predictable minimally invasive regenerative procedure able to create sufficient ridge volume suitable for prosthetically driven implant placement.”

Dr. Daniele Cardaropoli

Prosthetically guided implant placement can be planned 4 months after the ridge augmentation procedure. The specifically designed Geistlich Bio-Gide® Shape was able to protect the Geistlich Bio-Oss Collagen®, not only in the coronal position but also aided in recreating the missing buccal bone.”

Dr. Daniele Cardaropoli

The use of the Cardaropoli Compactor instrument helped to carefully adapt Geistlich Bio-Gide® Shape onto the inner buccal surface of the alveolus and to properly compact Geistlich Bio-Oss Collagen® inside the socket.”

Dr. Daniele Cardaropoli

Dr. Daniele Cardaropoli

Periodontist – PRoED, Institute for Professional Education in Dentistry, Torino

Doctor of Dentistry and Certificate in Periodontology from the University of Torino, Italy.
Active member of the Italian Society of Periodontology, European Federation of Periodontology, Italian Academy of osseointegration and Academy of osseointegration. International member of the American Academy of Periodontology. Scientific Director of Institute for Professional Education in Dentistry (PRoED), Torino. Member of the Editorial Board of The International Journal of Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry. Private practice in Torino, Italy.

BIOBRIEF

Combined Horizontal and Vertical Regeneration Using a CAD-CAM Titanium Scaffold

Dr. Gian Maria Ragucci
Prof. Federico Hernández-Alfaro

THE SITUATION

A 54-year-old, systematically healthy male patient (*ASA) came to our attention presenting with partial edentulism in the lower jaw and requiring a fixed and esthetic rehabilitation, refusing any removable solution. The clinical and radiographic evaluation resulted in significant bone atrophy both in the vertical and horizontal components; which makes it impossible to place both conventional implants and short or narrow implants.

*American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification System

THE RISK PROFILE

Low RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk
Patient’s healthIntact immune system
Non-smoker 
Light smokerImpaired immune system 
Patient’s esthetic requirementsLowMediumHigh
Height of smile lineLowMediumHigh
Gingival biotypeThick – “low scalloped”Medium – “medium scalloped”Thin – “high scalloped”
Shape of dental crownsRectangularTriangular
Infection at implant sightNoneChronicAcute
Bone height at adjacent tooth site≤ 5 mm from contact point5.5 – 6.5 mm from contact point≥ 7 mm from contact point
Restorative status of adjacent toothIntactRestored
Width of tooth gap1 tooth (≥ 7 mm)1 tooth (≤ 7 mm)2 teeth or more
Soft-tissue anatomyIntactCompromised
Bone anatomy of the alveolar ridgeNo defectHorizontal defectVertical defect
watch video download pdf

THE APPROACH

Solving the case was developed in two steps: first bone reconstruction to restore the ideal anatomy, second positioning of the prosthetically guided implants. An individualized regeneration technique was chosen using a CAD-CAM titanium scaffold (Yxoss CBR®) in conjunction with a mix of 60% autogenous bone and 40% Geistlich Bio-Oss®, covered by Geistlich Bio-Gide®. At 9 months, the titanium scaffold was easily removed and 3 prosthetically guided implants were placed, completely surrounded by bone. At 12 months, a free gingival graft was performed to re-establish the missing amount of keratinized mucosa. Finally, at 16 months, the final rehabilitation was carried out with a fixed prosthesis on implants.

Panoramic radiographic view of the defect
Horizontal and vertical augmentation step by step
Baseline situation (left) and 9-month follow-up (right)
Scaffold removal and implant placement step by step
Soft-tissue management with free gingival graft
Final restoration
Periapical radiographs of implants and prosthesis
Final restoration at 16 months

“Combined horizontal and vertical bone augmentation utilizing a CAD CAM titanium scaffold can be achieved with less surgical time and less complications.”

THE OUTCOME

The final resolution of the case was very satisfactory. There were no complications during all the procedures performed. The Yxoss CBR® allowed for easier reconstructive surgery and a significant reduction in surgical times, thanks to the precise dimensions of the scaffold. This resulted in a favorable post- operative situation for the patient and complications were prevented.

Final restoration at 16 months

Vertical bone reconstruction combining the use of Yxoss CBR®, Geistlich Bio-Oss® and Geistlich Bio-Gide® allows a predictable regenerative procedure that is able to create sufficient bone volume suitable for prosthetically guided implant placement.”

Dr. Gian Maria Ragucci

The use of CAD-CAM Titanium scaffold Yxoss CBR® allows an ideal bone regeneration and a faster and easier surgery.”

Dr. Gian Maria Ragucci

Dr. Gian Maria Ragucci

Universitat Internacional de Catalunya (UIC), Barcelona Dental degree at Universidad Europea de Madrid 2015
International Master in oral surgery at UIC, Barcelona 2018
PhD student at UIC, Barcelona 2018
EAO Certification program in implant dentistry 2018
EAO European prize in implant dentistry 2019

Prof. Federico Hernández-Alfaro

Full professor & Chairman, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, UIC, Barcelona
Institute of Maxillofacial Surgery, Teknon Medical Center, Barcelona

BIOBRIEF

Immediate Mandibular Molar Transition

Dr. Peter Hunt

THE SITUATION

The case here is typical enough, a failing mandibular molar with a vertical sub-osseous fracture. Traditionally, the replacement process can take three or more surgical exposures (extraction and regeneration), (implant placement), (second stage exposure) and more than a year of therapy.

THE RISK PROFILE

Low RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk
Patient’s healthIntact immune system
Non-smoker 
Light smokerImpaired immune system 
Patient’s esthetic requirementsLowMediumHigh
Height of smile lineLowMediumHigh
Gingival biotypeThick – “low scalloped”Medium – “medium scalloped”Thin – “high scalloped”
Shape of dental crownsRectangularTriangular
Infection at implant sightNoneChronicAcute
Bone height at adjacent tooth site≤ 5 mm from contact point5.5 – 6.5 mm from contact point≥ 7 mm from contact point
Restorative status of adjacent toothIntactRestored
Width of tooth gap1 tooth (≥ 7 mm)1 tooth (≤ 7 mm)2 teeth or more
Soft-tissue anatomyIntactCompromised
Bone anatomy of the alveolar ridgeNo defectHorizontal defectVertical defect
watch video download pdf

THE APPROACH

Immediate molar replacement requires atraumatic removal of the fractured tooth, careful socket debridement and development of a channel for an ideally positioned implant. The implant then needs to be placed down in the bone channel with the implant platform positioned just below the socket walls. It needs to be stable. Channel deficiency augmentation is achieved with Geistlich Bio-Oss Collagen® which is covered with a collagen matrix, Geistlich Mucograft® with the edges tucked under the gingival margins and sealed over with tissue glue.

Initial Situation: a failing mandibular molar with a vertical sub-osseous fracture.
A pre-operative radiograph and CBCT showing the cross-section of the involved tooth.
An implant site was developed by placing a pilot drill down the mesial root space, then uprighting it. This was continued up through the drill sequence. The mesial radicular septum is moved in the process.
A Camlog® 5.0 x 11 mm implant was placed with the platform set just down below the bone height of the socket walls.
After placing a 4.0 mm height cylindrical gingiva former in the implant, 250 mg of Geistlich Bio-Oss Collagen® was packed down in the socket around the implant.
Geistlich Mucograft® was adapted to the region then tucked down under the gingival margin.
The gingival margins were adapted and closed together with 4.0 teflon sutures (Cytoplast™, Osteogenics). The region was then covered with Glustich – PeriAcryl®90 Oral Tissue Adhesive.
After 3 months of healing, the top of the gingiva former is exposed and the situation is ready for Emergence Profile Development. This is quite standard.
4 months later following Emergence Profile Development.
An occlusal view of the final one-piece, screw-retained zirconia crown restoration based on a Camlog® Titanium Base Abutment.

“The patient desires an implant placement for a fractured mandibular molar, as fast as possible.”

– Dr. Peter Hunt

THE OUTCOME

This single stage replacement protocol has proven to be simple, safe and highly effective providing the socket is fully degranulated and the implant is stable and not loaded in the early healing stages. It works well when a gingiva former is immediately placed into the implant instead of a cover screw, Geistlich Bio-Oss Collagen® is packed around the implant to fill the residual socket, then covered with a Geistlich Mucograft® and sutured. There is no need for flap advancement to cover over the socket.

This procedure really just merges a socket regeneration procedure with implant placement. It’s a simple and effective procedure which has now become quite standard for us.”

Dr. Peter Hunt

Dr. Peter Hunt

After graduate training on an Annenberg Fellowship at the University of Pennsylvania, dr. hunt helped start up the University of the Western Cape dental School in Cape Town, South Africa. he returned to the University of Pennsylvania where in time he became Clinical Professor of Periodontics. later he helped start up Nova Southeastern‘s dental School where he was Professor of Restorative dentistry, Post Graduate director and director of Implantology. he has had a private practice in Philadelphia focusing on implant and rehabilitation dentistry since 1981.

BIOBRIEF

Ramal Bone Graft for Congenitally Missing Maxillary Lateral Incisor

Dr. Richard E. Bauer, III

THE SITUATION

An 18-year-old female presented with a congenitally missing tooth #10. The patient previously sought care by another provider and had undergone guided bone regeneration with allograft and subsequent implant placement with additional grafting at the time of implant placement. The implant ultimately failed and was removed prior to my initial consultation. An examination revealed maximal incisal opening, within normal limits, missing #10 with 6 mm ridge width. In addition there was a significant palpable cleft-like depression on the facial aspect of the ridge, adequate attached tissue but reduced vertical height in relation to adjacent dentition and attached tissue. Previous surgeries resulted in extensive fibrous tissue with scarring at site #10. Plan: A ramal bone graft is indicated at the congenitally missing site #10 with Geistlich Bio-Oss® and Geistlich Mucograft® matrix utilized for ridge augmentation prior to secondary implant placement.

THE RISK PROFILE

Low RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk
Patient’s healthIntact immune system
Non-smoker 
Light smokerImpaired immune system 
Patient’s esthetic requirementsLowMediumHigh
Height of smile lineLowMediumHigh
Gingival biotypeThick – “low scalloped”Medium – “medium scalloped”Thin – “high scalloped”
Shape of dental crownsRectangularTriangular
Infection at implant sightNoneChronicAcute
Bone height at adjacent tooth site≤ 5 mm from contact point5.5 – 6.5 mm from contact point≥ 7 mm from contact point
Restorative status of adjacent toothIntactRestored
Width of tooth gap1 tooth (≥ 7 mm)1 tooth (≤ 7 mm)2 teeth or more
Soft-tissue anatomyIntactCompromised
Bone anatomy of the alveolar ridgeNo defectHorizontal defectVertical defect
watch video download pdf

THE APPROACH

The goals for this patient are to reconstruct the osseous foundation and provide a matrix for improvement with the overlying soft tissue. Specifically, a coordinated multidisciplinary plan was established with the restoring dentist, periodontist and oral surgeon. A plan for idealized anterior cosmetic prosthetic restoration was established. Sequencing of treatment was established. Surgical phase one included a ramal bone graft to site #10 and Essix type temporary prosthesis for immediate post-operative phase followed by a temporary Maryland bridge. Surgical phase two included implant placement and simultaneous crown lengthening and osteoplasty. This stage was done with immediate provisionalization.

A flap has been raised and reveals a significant facial and palatal defect at congenitally missing site #10.
Harvested ramal graft. Slightly over-sized to allow for mitering and harvest of particulate autograft with a bone trap on the suction.
Onlay graft now secured with two fixation screws (Stryker) with a lag screw technique. Geistlich Bio-Oss Collagen® has been placed on the palatal aspect of site #10
Combination of a fixated onlay graft with Geistlich Bio-Oss®/autograft particulate graft at the periphery and over the facial plate of the adjacent dentition
Geistlich Mucograft® matrix placed over facial augmentation of the adjacent dentition and ridge crest of the augmented site
Closure following ramal grafting and Geistlich Mucograft®matrix application
Implant placement with static guide and dental implant hand driver
Implant placement with slight subcrestal placement of the platform just prior to osteoplasty by the periodontist.

“This is a young patient with a congenitally missing incisor that has high esthetic concerns and has had multiple failed surgical attempts that is now presenting for definitive management.”

THE OUTCOME

This case was dependent upon adequate hard-tissue reconstruction combined with soft-tissue manipulation to eliminate scar tissue and provide esthetic recontouring. Obtaining an adequate autogenous graft combined with Geistlich Bio-Oss® at the periphery of the onlay graft is essential for anterior-posterior and vertical augmentation. Utilizing a Geistlich Mucograft® matrix at the ridge crest to help contain the particulate graft and improve the soft-tissue profile for subsequent immediate provisionalization and re-contouring of the surrounding soft tissue played a significant role in the esthetic success.

Immediate provisional in place two days after implant placement and osteoplasty. There has been significant gain in bony architecture and development of soft-tissue contours at a site that was extremely deficient of structure to begin with.”

Dr. Richard E. Bauer, III

Dr. Richard E. Bauer, III

Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeon – University of Pittsburgh

Richard E. Bauer, III, DMD, MD is a graduate of the University of Pittsburgh Schools of Dental Medicine and Medicine. Dr. Bauer completed his residency training in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. Dr. Bauer has served on multiple committees for the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (AAOMS). He is a full-time faculty member and Residency Program Director at the University of Pittsburgh in the department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and his practice is focused on dental implants and corrective jaw surgery. He has been active in research with focus on bone regeneration and virtual applications for computer assisted planning and surgery.

BIOBRIEF

Prosthetically Guided Regeneration (PGR) in the Posterior Maxilla

Paolo Casentini, DDS

THE SITUATION

The 60-year-old female patient’s chief complaint was represented by unsatisfactory esthetics and function, related to loss of multiple maxillary teeth. Her request focused on improving esthetics and function by means of a fixed reconstruction.

The patient presented five residual anterior maxillary teeth (from 6 to 10) that could be maintained. After preliminary periodontal diagnosis and treatment, specific diagnostic steps for implant treatment demonstrated inadequate bone volume for implant placement.

THE RISK PROFILE

Low RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk
Patient’s healthIntact immune system
Non-smoker 
Light smokerImpaired immune system 
Patient’s esthetic requirementsLowMediumHigh
Height of smile lineLowMediumHigh
Gingival biotypeThick – “low scalloped”Medium – “medium scalloped”Thin – “high scalloped”
Shape of dental crownsRectangularTriangular
Infection at implant sightNoneChronicAcute
Bone height at adjacent tooth site≤ 5 mm from contact point5.5 – 6.5 mm from contact point≥ 7 mm from contact point
Restorative status of adjacent toothIntactRestored
Width of tooth gap1 tooth (≥ 7 mm)1 tooth (≤ 7 mm)2 teeth or more
Soft-tissue anatomyIntactCompromised
Bone anatomy of the alveolar ridgeNo defectHorizontal defectVertical defect
watch video download pdf

THE APPROACH

Bi-lateral sinus lift with Geistlich Bio-Oss Pen® and horizontal bone augmentation with a 1:1 mix of autogenous bone and Geistlich Bio-Oss® were performed six months prior to implant placement, following a Prosthetically Guided Regenerative (PGR) approach. The augmented sites were protected with Geistlich Bio-Gide® stabilized with titanium pins. The template utilized for radiographic diagnosis and GBR was then used to guide the implants’ placement.

Baseline full-mouth intra-oral view: the residual maxillary teeth were preliminarily reconstructed with a composite mock-up. The horizontal atrophy of the posterior areas of the maxilla is clearly visible.
The cone beam, realized with a radio-opaque diagnostic template, shows inadequate bone volume for implant placement in all the analyzed sites.
The use of the diagnostic template during the augmentation procedure helps to highlight the presence of bone defects in relationship to the restorative plan and future position of implants.
Large Geistlich Bio-Oss® particles are directly applied inside the sinus with Geistlich Bio-Oss Pen®.
The Geistlich Bio-Gide®, fixed with titanium pins is used to protect and stabilize the augmented site. As the surgical template shows, the bone augmentation is based on the future restorative project following the principle of PGR.
The same surgical procedure is performed on the left posterior side of the maxilla.
Cone-beam 6 months after surgery and prior to implant placement. The relationship between the template used for diagnosis and the bone crest reveals adequate bone volume to place implants in the correct prosthetically driven position.
Implant placement was guided by the same template utilized for diagnosis and bone augmentation.
Final view of the prosthetic reconstruction demonstrates bio-mimetic integration of implant-supported prostheses and ceramic veneers bonded to residual natural teeth.
The panoramic radiograph shows adequate integration of the implants and absence of peri-implant bone resorption.

Using a diagnostic template during the GBR procedure helps to highlight the presence of bone defects in relationship to the restorative plan and future position of implants.

THE OUTCOME

After a healing period of six months, adequate bone volume was achieved for the placement of five implants. Geistlich Fibro-Gide® was also used to optimize soft tissue volume at the buccal aspect of implants.

Implants were early loaded with a temporary screw-retained fixed prostheses six weeks after placement. The final prosthetic reconstruction included ceramic veneers of the frontal residual teeth and zirconium-ceramic screw-retained fixed prostheses on implants.

Patient satisfaction is my driver for excellence. That’s why I always apply the Prosthetically Guided Regeneration principle together with Geistlich Biomaterials: proven and predictable long-term patient success.”

Paolo Casentini, DDS

Paolo Casentini, DDS

Graduated in Dentistry at the University of Milan, Fellow and Past Chairman of the Italian section of ITI, Active member Italian Academy of Osseointegration. Co-author of 10 textbooks including ITI Treatment Guide volume 4, translated in eight languages, and “Pink Esthetic and Soft Tissues in Implant Dentistry” translated in five languages. His field of interest is advanced implantology in complex and esthetically demanding cases. He has extensively lectured in more than 40 countries.

BIOBRIEF

Avoiding Post-Implant Placement and Long Term Crestal Bone Resorption by Thickening Vertical Soft Tissue

Tamir Wardany, D.D.S.

THE SITUATION

Our patient is a 60-year-old caucasian male that had just finished a large ridge augmentation in the area of #4 and #5. We used the sausage technique for the ridge augmentation and yielded excellent bone volume in this area. However, as we began the 2nd stage implant placement procedure, we noticed, as is frequently seen following a large ridge augmentation, very thin vertical soft tissue over the crest of the bone. We know that inadequate soft tissue thickness will lead to compromised vasculature and transfer of oxygen and nutrients to the bone which can absolutely lead to a loss of crestal bone surrounding the implants.

THE RISK PROFILE

Low RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk
Patient’s healthIntact immune system Light smokerImpaired immune system 
Patient’s esthetic requirementsLowMediumHigh
Height of smile lineLowMediumHigh
Gingival biotypeThick – “low scalloped”Medium – “medium scalloped”Thin – “high scalloped”
Shape of dental crownsRectangularTriangular
Infection at implant sightNoneChronicAcute
Bone height at adjacent tooth site≤ 5 mm from contact point5.5 – 6.5 mm from contact point≥ 7 mm from contact point
Restorative status of adjacent toothIntactRestored
Width of tooth gap1 tooth (≥ 7 mm)1 tooth (≤ 7 mm)2 teeth or more
Soft-tissue anatomyIntactCompromised
Bone anatomy of the alveolar ridgeNo defectHorizontal defectVertical defect

Note: Bone was augmented prior to this case report due to a severe horizontal defect.
watch video download pdf

THE APPROACH

Our goal here is to create increased vertical soft tissue thickness over the crest of the implant site. Following implant placement and placement of the cover screws, we used Geistlich Fibro-Gide® over the implants and then layed it over the crest and buccal aspect. Following the placement of Geistlich Fibro-Gide®, we gently released the full thickness flap so that we can achieve tension-free primary closure over the site.

6 months following horizontal ridge augmentation, using Dr. Urban’s sausage technique, we re-entered the site for implant placement using a full thickness flap with no vertical incisions, to not disrupt collateral blood supply. There is excellent bone volume, but a very thin vertical soft tissue volume over the crest of the implant site.
Straumann implants are placed in sites #4 and #5 to a 25Ncm torque value with no issues and the cover screws were placed.
Geistlich Fibro-Gide® is placed crestally over the implants and draped to the buccal and slightly towards the lingual. Geistlich Fibro-Gide® was trimmed slightly to minimize the thickness of the material.
The flap was released so that we can achieve tension-free primary closure over the implant and the Geistlich Fibro-Gide® soft tissue augmentation site.
Following an 8 week healing period, we make a crestal incision and lay a conservative full-thickness flap to uncover the implants. We observe a 3-4 mm increase in verticle soft tissue thickness over the implant site.
We allow 3 weeks following the initial uncovering and can now see beautiful soft tissue architecture surrounding the implants.
Prior to the restorative process we see the pre-restorative radiograph with the healing abutments in place and we can also observe excellent crestal bone levels around the implants.
1 year follow-up. The restorative dentist opted to splint the crowns together. The patient did not want implants posterior to this area and he did not want any sinus augmentation as he had a history of sinus issues.

The use of Geistlich Fibro-Gide® is a wonderful alternative to using a connective tissue graft to thicken vertical soft tissue, which will help minimize crestal bone loss around implants.

THE OUTCOME

The soft tissue that will now surround the implant site is thick and healthy due to the use of Geistlich Fibro-Gide® at the time of implant placement. This is a simple technique and only requires a minimal amount of flap release to achieve tension-free primary closure over the site. The results are phenomenal and will be beneficial for the stability of the crestal bone surrounding the implants for years to come.

1-year follow-up. The restorative dentist opted to splint the crowns together. The patient did not want implants posterior to this area, and he did not want any sinus augmentation as he had a history of sinus issues.

Thin vertical soft tissue over the implant site following ridge augmentation is one of the key factors which may lead to crestal bone loss around the implants that will be placed.

Tamir Wardany, D.D.S.

I find the Mini-Me Periosteal to be my most versatile instrument for all my hard and soft tissue cases. I always have this instrument out on my surgical tray.

Tamir Wardany, D.D.S.

Beginning with thin soft tissue, we were able to achieve very thick and healthy vertical soft tissue over the implants, which will improve blood flow to the bone and minimize crestal bone loss in future.

Tamir Wardany, D.D.S.

Tamir Wardany, D.D.S.

Dr. Wardany is a graduate of Meharry Medical College School of Dentistry in Nashville, TN. After completion of a dental implant fellowship through State University of New York Stonybrook, he continues to spend extensive time in Europe training under Dr. Istvan Urban in the field of advanced bone and soft tissue regeneration.

He is a Diplomate of the American Board of Implantology, and lectures extensively on the topic of bone regeneration. He maintains a referral based surgical implant practice in San Francisco and Sacramento, California.

BIOBRIEF

A Regenerative Approach to Peri-implantitis

Hector L. Sarmiento, D.M.D., MSc.

THE SITUATION

A 55-year-old man was referred to me by his general dentist. Upon initial clinical and radiographic findings, failing implant #9 showed signs of peri-implantitis that included BoP, Suppuration, 9+mm PD and radiographic bone loss affecting both the implant and the natural adjacent tooth. Patient stated that although his gums bleed, he does not have any pain. Gingival erythema was also found.

THE RISK PROFILE

Low RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk
Patient’s healthIntact immune system Light smokerImpaired immune system 
Patient’s esthetic requirementsLowMediumHigh
Height of smile lineLowMediumHigh
Gingival biotypeThick – “low scalloped”Medium – “medium scalloped”Thin – “high scalloped”
Shape of dental crownsRectangularTriangular
Infection at implant sightNoneChronicAcute
Bone height at adjacent tooth site≤ 5 mm from contact point5.5 – 6.5 mm from contact point≥ 7 mm from contact point
Restorative status of adjacent toothIntactRestored
Width of tooth gap1 tooth (≥ 7 mm)1 tooth (≤ 7 mm)2 teeth or more
Soft-tissue anatomyIntactCompromised
Bone anatomy of the alveolar ridgeNo defectHorizontal defectVertical defect

Note: Peri-implantitis on implant #9 migrating to the mesial portion of root #8
watch video download pdf

THE APPROACH

The clinical goals were to eliminate the peri-implant infection, restore hard and soft-tissues and have long-term success. The technique utilized was a systematic regenerative approach to eliminate the underlying cause of the peri-implantitis infection and restore hard and soft-tissues to prior health.

Initial situation, patient presented with radiographic and clinically traditional signs of peri-implantitis, including bleeding on probing, suppuration, radiographic progressive bone loss and clinical pathologic probing depths.
Mechanical debridement was achieved using titanium scalers, an ultrasonic device with an implant protective cap and titanium brushes to remove all of the visible contaminants of the implant surface. Citric acid was then placed on shreds of a non-woven gauze and applied to the surface for approx. 1min. Copious irrigation was done using saline solution and the surface was ablated using the Er:YAG laser at 20pps/50mj.
After the surface was prepped and no signs of residual granulation tissue was noted, the defect was grafted with Geistlich Bio-Oss®. Attention was given towards not augmenting beyond the bony envelope.
A protective Geistlich Bio-Gide® membrane was placed over Geistlich Bio-Oss®.
Geistlich Fibro-Gide® was placed over Geistlich Bio-Gide® to enhance soft-tissue volume and quality. Geistlich Fibro-Gide® was trimmed and adapted to the defect site ensuring a tension free closure.
Geistlich Fibro-Gide® was place on the top of the bone graft to enhance soft-tissue thickness. Geistlich Fibro-Gide® is porous. We can observe the rapid penetration of blood through the matrix.
Closure with a tension-free flap was achieved by releasing incisions and secured using 4-0 chromic gut sutures.
1.5 year post-operative photo and radiograph show the healing of the soft-tissues with no signs of peri-implantitis and adequate tissue thickening. Radiographic bone levels have maintained stable over the course of the year.

Geistlich Fibro-Gide® has the capacity to enhance the soft-tissue during a bone regenerative approach.

THE OUTCOME

My observation at the 1.5 year follow-up shows the elimination of peri-implantitis and complete peri-implant health was achieved showing a reduction in BOP, PD and most importantly soft tissue thickness stability. Radiographically, crestal bone shows no signs of progressive pathological loss and has maintained adequate volume.

Geistlich Fibro-Gide® was utilized to enhance the soft-tissues during a regenerative peri-implantitis approach. In my opinion, healthy, thick soft-tissue is easier for a patient to maintain and creates a better environment for long-term survival.

Hector L. Sarmiento, D.M.D., MSc.

Hector L. Sarmiento, D.M.D., MSc.

Dr. Hector Sarmiento was awarded his D.M.D. degree by the University of Rochester. He is uniquely trained in both maxillofacial surgery and periodontics. He is a professor in the maxillofacial surgery department of trauma and reconstructive unit at the Regional Hospital in Mexico and is an Assistant Clinical Professor in periodontics at the University of Pennsylvania. Along with his periodontal degree, he also received his masters in oral biology from the University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Sarmiento is an international and national lecturer and has published numerous articles in peer reviewed journals and textbooks. His research focus includes infected dental implants such as peri-implantitis, sinus complications as well as bone biology. Dr. Sarmiento maintains his private practice in the upper east side of Manhattan in NYC.

BIOBRIEF

3D Bone Augmentation Using Customized Titanium Mesh in Conjunction with Autogenous Bone and Bovine Bone Material Granules

Dr. Matteo Chiapasco
Matteo Chiapasco, D.D.S., M.D.
Grazia Tommasato, D.D.S., M.S.C.

THE SITUATION

A 75-year-old systemically healthy female came to our attention presenting with absent mandibular second bicuspids and molars and requiring a fixed rehabilitation supported by implants as she refused a removable solution. The clinical and radiographic evaluation showed a relevant vertical and horizontal bone atrophy of such an extent that short or narrow implants were not considered a reliable option. The patient smoked <10 cigarettes per day.

THE RISK PROFILE

Low RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk
Patient’s healthIntact immune system Light smokerImpaired immune system 
Patient’s esthetic requirementsLowMediumHigh
Height of smile lineLowMediumHigh
Gingival biotypeThick – “low scalloped”Medium – “medium scalloped”Thin – “high scalloped”
Shape of dental crownsRectangularTriangular
Infection at implant sightNoneChronicAcute
Bone height at adjacent tooth site≤ 5 mm from contact point5.5 – 6.5 mm from contact point≥ 7 mm from contact point
Restorative status of adjacent toothIntactRestored
Width of tooth gap1 tooth (≥ 7 mm)1 tooth (≤ 7 mm)2 teeth or more
Soft-tissue anatomyIntactCompromised
Bone anatomy of the alveolar ridgeNo defectHorizontal defectVertical defect
Note: Yxoss CBR® by ReOss® Screws 5mm – MCbio (G-fix system)
watch video download pdf

THE APPROACH

The main goal was to obtain a horizontal and vertical reconstruction of the deficient alveolar bone in order to allow safe and prosthetically-guided implant placement. Reconstruction was obtained by means of a customized titanium mesh, Yxoss CBR®, in combination with a mixture of autologous bone chips harvested from the mandibular ramus and bovine bone mineral, Geistlich Bio-Oss®.

Panoramic radiograph of initial situation showing the atrophic mandibular areas.
The final Yxoss CBR® ready for use.
The customized Ti-mesh is filled with the autologous bone chips mixed with Geistlich Bio-Oss® granules in a 50:50 ratio.
Intra-operative view at the end of the reconstruction showing the bone augmentation: the customized mesh was stabilized with 2 fixation screws.
A Geistlich Bio-Gide® membrane is used to cover the customized mesh in order to increase the barrier effect.
Intra-operative view after primary closure of the surgical wound.
Panoramic radiograph after surgery.
Clinical control 3 months later showing favorable healing of the soft tissue and correction of the defect.


The 3-dimensional reproduction of the left edentulous area permits the production of a precise and customized Ti-mesh.

THE OUTCOME

Post-operative recovery of this patient was uneventful, no complications such as dehiscence or late exposure of the customized mesh, with complete correction of the initial defect. The Yxoss CBR® allowed an easy and faster reconstruction thanks to the precision of the prefabricated mesh filled with autologous chips, Geistlich Bio-Oss® and Geistlich Bio-Gide®.

While it is important to be an expert in guided bone regeneration, this technique reduces the difficulties to less than one-half and is predictable, effective, and precise.

Matteo Chiapasco, D.D.S., M.D.

GBR combining the use of Geistlich Bio-Oss®, autologous bone chips taken from the mandibular ramus associated with a customized Yxoss CBR®, covered with a Geistlich Bio-Gide®, is a predictable regenerative procedure allowing for the creation of an adequate volume suitable for a prosthetically-guided implant placement with optimization of the final restoration.

Matteo Chiapasco, D.D.S., M.D.
Dr. Matteo Chiapasco

Matteo Chiapasco, D.D.S., M.D.

Graduated in Medicine and specialized in Maxillofacial Surgery at the University of Milan, Italy. Professor, Unit of Oral Surgery, University of Milan; Associate Professor, Loma Linda University, Los Angeles, California, USA.

Grazia Tommasato, D.D.S., M.S.C.

Graduated in Dentistry in 2013, specialized in Oral Surgery at the University of Milan magna cum laude. PhD student and a medical consultant of the Clinical Unit of Oral Surgery (“G. Vogel” Clinic, Milan).

BIOBRIEF

Enhance Periodontal Phenotype with Geistlich Mucograft® for Soft Tissue Augmentation 

Allison Rascon, D.D.S., M.S.

THE SITUATION

A healthy, non-smoking, 37- year-old female presented for second stage surgery at implant sites #23 and #26. Limited keratinized tissue width and gingival thickness can be appreciated in the edentulous ridge, and the patient can be classified as having a thin periodontal phenotype. Additionally, the patient states she experiences sensitivity, and the tissue feels “tender” when brushing. The patient hopes to address her needs in a minimally invasive manner. 

THE RISK PROFILE

Low RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk
Patient’s healthIntact immune system 
Non-smoker
Light smokerImpaired immune system 
Heavy smoker
Patient’s esthetic requirementsLowMediumHigh
Height of smile lineLowMediumHigh
Gingival biotypeThick – “low scalloped”Medium – “medium scalloped”Thin – “high scalloped”
Shape of dental crownsRectangularTriangular
Infection at implant sightNoneChronicAcute
Bone height at adjacent tooth site≤ 5 mm from contact point5.5 – 6.5 mm from contact point≥ 7 mm from contact point
Restorative status of adjacent toothIntactRestored
Width of tooth gap1 tooth (≥ 7 mm)1 tooth (≤ 7 mm)2 teeth or more
Soft-tissue anatomyIntactCompromised
Bone anatomy of the alveolar ridgeNo defectHorizontal defectVertical defect
Note: The patient‘s keratinized tissue is inadequate (<2 mm) and the recession on the canines can be classified as RT 1 defects. 
watch video download pdf

THE APPROACH

The aim of treatment was to enhance the existing periodontal phenotype from that of one which is thin, with limited keratinized tissue, to one that is thick and maintains an adequate band of attached keratinized tissue. Geistlich Mucograft® was used in conjunction with a PRF membrane, in order to provide optimal wound healing, due to its chemotactic and angiogenic properties. 

A mid-facial incision was made, with the intent to preserve the minimal keratinized tissue that was available, as well as vertical incisions along the line angles of the canines to reflect a partial thickness flap.
Platelet-rich fibrin clots were formed by centrifugation. The leukocyte-PRF (L-PRF) was extracted, and the L-PRF was used to hydrate Geistlich Mucograft®
Geistlich Mucograft® and PRF stabilized via glycolon sutures.
Clinical situation at three-week follow-up.
Occlusal view at twelve-month follow-up.
Frontal view at twelve-month follow-up.

A viable option that allows for reduced patient morbidity, adequate functional necessity, and ideal esthetics.

THE OUTCOME

Dual application of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) and a xenogenic collagen matrix, Geistlich Mucograft®, led to successful augmentation of the edentulous ridge. At one-year, the tissues appear healthy, and an increased keratinized tissue width and gingival thickness can be appreciated. By using this soft tissue alternative, the patient was able to avoid post-operative morbidity from a second surgical site, and the chief complaint was addressed. 

Final restoration: 12-month healing

Soft tissue procedures are technique sensitive and success requires appropriate graft size and thickness, recipient bed preparation, and adequate stabilization. Having a xenograft matrix provides control over having the necessary graft dimensions, without requiring a second surgical site, and it’s easy-handling properties ensure placement and stability are done in a predictable manner.” 

Allison Rascon, D.D.S, M.S

With adequate recipient bed preparation, the ease of manipulation with the hydrated xenograft matrix allowed for intimate adaptation, and the overlaying PRF was easily compressed against Geistlich Mucograft®. At twelve months follow up, stable soft tissue dimensions are observed with adequate thickness, as well as esthetically appropriate blend of the tissue color and texture.”  

Allison Rascon, D.D.S, M.S

Allison Rascon, D.D.S., M.S.

Dr. Allison Rascon was born and raised in Miami, Florida. She received her Bachelor of Science in Biomedical and Health Sciences from the University of Central Florida. She received her DDS from New York University, where she graduated with honors in Periodontics and was inducted into the Omicron Kappa Upsilon National Dental Honor Society in 2020. She then went on to receive a Certificate in Periodontics and Master of Science in Oral Biology from the University of Pennsylvania. Currently, she is board-eligible by the American Academy of Periodontology. She is an active member of the AAP, AO, OF, and ADA. Aside from her active participation in organized dentistry, she is also passionate about her research in periodontal and peri-implant regeneration. Dr. Rascon was a recipient of the George J. Coslet Memorial Scholarship in 2021 and 2022. During her residency, she was awarded the Best Oral Clinical Presentation Award at the Academy of Osseointegration Annual Meeting in 2022 and was the recipient of the Northeastern Society of Periodontists Tannenbaum/ Schoor Resident School Competition Award for 2023. Currently, Dr. Rascon works in private practice in Manhattan, NY.

BIOBRIEF

Clinical Efficacy of Geistlich Mucograft® in Regeneration of Oral Mucosa Combined with the Surgical Treatment of Peri-implantitis in Implants with Lack of Keratinized Tissue

Dr. Alberto Ortiz-Vigón
Dr. Erik Regidor Correa

THE SITUATION

Adult patient, non-smoker and without relevant systemic history, attends to clinic referring peri-implant tissue inflammation, bleeding and brushing discomfort around her implant in the upper jaw. Clinically peri-implant pocket depth > 5 mm, bleeding and suppuration on probing were observed. Furthermore, the implant presented < 2 mm of keratinized mucosa and radiographic horizontal bone loss.

THE RISK PROFILE

Low RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk
Patient’s healthIntact immune system 
Non-smoker
Light smokerImpaired immune system 
Heavy smoker
Patient’s esthetic requirementsLowMediumHigh
Height of smile lineLowMediumHigh
Gingival biotypeThick – “low scalloped”Medium – “medium scalloped”Thin – “high scalloped”
Shape of dental crownsRectangularTriangular
Infection at implant sightNoneChronicAcute
Bone height at adjacent tooth site≤ 5 mm from contact point5.5 – 6.5 mm from contact point≥ 7 mm from contact point
Restorative status of adjacent toothIntactRestored
Width of tooth gap1 tooth (≥ 7 mm)1 tooth (≤ 7 mm)2 teeth or more
Soft-tissue anatomyIntactCompromised
Bone anatomy of the alveolar ridgeNo defectHorizontal defectVertical defect
watch video download pdf

THE APPROACH

Intrasulcular incision was made and a mucosal partial thickness flap was raised. The recipient site was prepared by sharp disection in order to create a periosteal bed free of any muscle attachment. Peri-implant granulation tissue was removed and implantoplasty was performed. Finally, Geistlich Mucograft® was used to support the gain of keratinized tissue. Thus, the collagen matrix was sutured with the resulting flap apically at the base of the newly created vestibulum.

Pathological peri-implant pocket depth combined with bleeding on probing.
Partial thickness flap in order to create a periosteal bed free of any muscle attachment and apically positioned.
Implantoplasty of the exposed rough implant surface using burs and silicon carbide polishers.
Xenogeneic collagen matrix structure (Geistlich Mucograft®).
Future position of the xenogeneic collagen matrix facilitated by prosthodontic abutment.
Suture of xenogeneic collagen matrix around the abutment and over the recipient bed.
Buccal view of xenogeneic collagen matrix and apically positioned flap.
Occlusal view of xenogeneic collagen matrix and apically positioned flap.
Lateral view of xenogeneic collagen matrix and apically positioned flap.
Peri-implant tissue health and maintenance of keratinized tissue after one year of surgical treatment.
Periimplant tissue health and maintenance of keratinized tissue after 2 years

Absence of > 2 mm of keratinized mucosa was associated with peri-implant soft-tissue inflammation, bleeding and discomfort on brushing.

THE OUTCOME

After two years follow-up, the successful outcome can be observed in terms of clinical peri-implant parameters, gain of keratinized mucosa without significant graft shrinkage and stability of vertical position of the mucosal margin.

The use of Geistlich Mucograft® xenogeneic collagen matrix for regeneration of oral mucosa, combined with the surgical respective approach to peri-implantitis provides an improvement in clinical parameters and increase of the peri-implant keratinized mucosa minimizing the risk of recession in the esthetic area.”

Dr. Erik Regidor Correa & Dr. Alberto Ortiz-Vigón

The use of soft-tissue substitutes may play an important role in patient perception and satisfaction without jeopardizing the final clinical outcome.”

Dr. Erik Regidor Correa & Dr. Alberto Ortiz-Vigón

Dr. Alberto Ortiz-Vigón

  • DDS from the University of the Basque Country
  • MSc and PhD in bone regeneration from the University Complutense of Madrid (UCM)
  • Master in Periodontology and Implant dentistry from the EFP
  • Research fellowship at the University of Gothenburg
  • MBA from the Deusto Business School
  • Assistant professor and clinical researcher at UCM and ThinkingPerio Research
  • PerioCentrum Clinic in Bilbao
  • Co-founder of ARC Healthtech Innovation Holding
  • Socially engaged & NGO co-founder of Smile is a Foundation

Dr. Erik Regidor Correa

  • DDS from the University of the Basque Country
  • MSc from the U. of the Basque Country
  • Master in Periodontology and Implant Dentistry U. of the Basque Country
  • PhD student in the U. of the Basque Country
  • Assistant professor and clinical researcher ThinkingPerio Research

WEBINAR

WEBINAR

WEBINAR

WEBINAR

WEBINAR

WEBINAR

WEBINAR

WEBINAR

WEBINAR

WEBINAR

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CHALLENGE:

The upper premolar had to be removed due to advanced periodontal disease and severe bone loss around the infected tooth. The bone defect was an intra-alveolar defect without dehiscence or fenestration.

AIM/APPROACH:

An early implant placement approach with a healing time of six weeks before implant placement was chosen. The bone augmentation with Geistlich Bio-Oss Collagen® was conducted simultaneously with implant placement. As this patient was treated in 1991, the case is one of the very first clinical applications of Geistlich Bio-Oss Collagen®

CONCLUSION:

A premolar grafted with Geistlich Bio-Oss Collagen® during implant placement showed good long-term result after 25 years. Satisfactory hard and soft-tissue contour are present 25 years after implantation.

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL SITUATION:

A 60-year-old female presented to the periodontics clinic at UTHSA for implant placement at sites #18 and #19. Upon clinical and radiographic examinations, the lower left edentulous ridge was diagnosed as a Siebert class III due to the presence of bucco-lingual and apico-coronal tissue defects. The treatment proposed included soft tissue grafting for increase of keratinized tissue followed by ridge augmentation using Yxoss CBR®mesh and a mix of autograft, vallos fibers, and platelet-rich plasma (PRP)

OUTCOME:

The vallos fibers combined with autogenous bone and the PRP created a stable fibrin bone graft that could be easily molded and contained within the mesh. Hydration with PRP was progressive until the graft reached the desired consistency. Wound healing following ridge augmentation was uneventful. There were no signs of infection or membrane exposure at the site. Mesh removal and implant placement is planned at 6-months following ridge augmentation.

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CHALLENGE:

  • The planning of the patient’s case takes local and general patient-specific risk factors into consideration according to the principles of backward planning for implant positioning.

AIM/APPROACH:

  • Highlights step-by-step the important procedures to regenerate the bone (horizontal and vertical) with the 3-D printing technology, Yxoss CBR®.

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CHALLENGE:

  • Insufficient alveolar ridge height for implant placement and proximity to the alveolar nerve
  • Autologous bone harvesting is associated with patient discomfort

AIM/APPROACH:

  • Interpositional grafting with Geistlich Bio-Oss® Block for vertical augmentation
  • Alveolar ridge volume preservation and minimizing patient morbidity

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CHALLENGE:

  • Severely atrophied alveolar ridge with insufficient bone volume for implant placement
  • ­­­­High complication rates and patient discomfort associated with large augmentations when using autologous bone grafts

AIM/APPROACH:

  • 3-dimensional augmentation of alveolar ridge by the fence technique for implant placement
  • At the same time reducing complication rates and patient discomfort

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CHALLENGE:

  • Insufficient alveolar ridge width for implant placement
  • Autologous bone is subject to resorption and may lead to loss of volume

AIM/APPROACH:

  • Ridge Split procedure in combination with Geistlich Bio-Oss® and Geistlich Bio-Gide® for horizontal augmentation
  • Preservation of the alveolar ridge volume

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CHALLENGE:

  • Insufficient alveolar ridge width for implant placement
  • Donor site morbidity after autologous bone block harvesting and resorption of autologous bone

AIM/APPROACH:

  • Horizontal alveolar ridge augmentation with Geistlich Bio-Oss® and Geistlich Bio-Gide®
  • Minimizing autologous bone harvesting and resorption protection

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CONCLUSIONS:

  • Geistlich Mucograft® with a keratinized tissue strip was utilized to increase vestibular depth and gain additional keratinized tissue.
  • Augmentation of severely atrophied alveolar ridge provided sufficient bone for implant placement 8 months following augmentation.

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

CLINICAL CASE

VIDEO

Introducing the first xenogenic / allogenic validated bone substitute1