Abstract:AbstractPurposeThe aim of the present randomized controlled clinical study was to test whether small bony dehiscence defects (≤5 mm) left to heal spontaneously result in the same clinical and radiological outcome as defects treated with guided bone regeneration (GBR).Materials and methodsTwenty‐two patients who received at least one implant with a small bony dehiscence defect were enrolled in the study. If the defect height was ≤5 mm, the site was randomly assigned to either the spontaneous healing (SH) group or the GBR group. In the SH group, the defect was left without any treatment. In the GBR group, the defects around the implants were grafted with deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) and covered with a native collagen membrane. Clinical and radiographic measurements were performed 6 months after implant placement with a reentry surgery and at the time of crown insertion and the subsequent follow‐up appointments at 3, 6, 12 and 18 months after loading. For statistical analyses, the mixed linear model was applied for the clinical and radiographic measurements observed around the implants. Simple comparisons of the location of the measurements in the two independent groups are performed with the Mann–Whitney U‐test. In addition, the mixed model assumptions were checked.ResultsThe implant and crown survival rate 18 months after loading was 100%, revealing no serious biologic or prosthetic complication. The mean changes of the buccal vertical bone height between implant placement and reentry surgery after 6 months revealed a small bone loss of −0.17 ± 1.79 mm (minimum −4 mm and maximum 2.5 mm) for the SH group and a bone gain of 1.79 ± 2.24 mm (minimum of −2.5 mm and maximum of 5 mm) for the GBR group, respectively (P = 0.017). Radiographic measurements demonstrated a slight bone loss of −0.39 ± 0.49 mm for the SH group and a stable bone level of 0.02 ± 0.48 mm for GBR group after 18 months. All peri‐implant soft tissue parameters revealed healthy tissues with no difference between the two groups.ConclusionSmall bony dehiscence defects left for spontaneous healing demonstrated high implant survival rates with healthy and stable soft tissues. However, they revealed more vertical bone loss at the buccal aspect 6 months after implant insertion and also more marginal bone loss between crown insertion and 18 months after loading compared to sites treated with GBR.

Tissue changes around dental implants installed in alveolar ridge preservation sites: A 1‐year follow‐up randomized controlled clinical trial

Soft tissue contour and radiographic evaluation of ridge preservation in early implant placement: A randomized controlled clinical trial

Early implant placement with or without alveolar ridge preservation in single tooth gaps renders similar esthetic, clinical and patient-reported outcome measures: One-year results of a randomized clinical trial

Influence of Healing Time on the Outcomes of Alveolar Ridge Preservation Using a Collagenated Bovine Bone Xenograft: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Combined use of xenogeneic bone substitute material covered with a native bilayer collagen membrane for alveolar ridge preservation: A randomized controlled clinical trial.

Tomographic Evaluation of Alveolar Ridge Preservation Using Bone Substitutes and Collagen Membranes—A Retrospective Pilot Study

Half‐ and full‐grafting alveolar ridge preservation with different sealing materials: A three‐arm randomized clinical trial

Alveolar Ridge Preservation Using a Collagenated Xenograft: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Alveolar ridge preservation and its impact on marginal bone level changes around dental implants: A retrospective, cohort comparative study

A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Collagen Matrix to Hemostatic Gelatin Sponge as Socket Seal in Alveolar Ridge Preservation

Extra oral digital scanning and imaging superimposition for volume analysis of bone remodeling after tooth extraction with and without 2 types of particulate porcine mineral insertion: A randomized controlled trial

Single immediate implant placement in the maxillary aesthetic zone with and without connective tissue grafting: Results of a 5‐year randomized controlled trial

Implants placed in an alveolar ridge with a sloped configuration. A 3-year prospective multicenter study

The long‐term impact of alveolar ridge preservation with xenograft bone mineral on peri‐implant health after 5 years in function: A retrospective cohort study of 108 patients assessed clinically and radiologically

The Assessment of Volumetric Changes for Alveolar Ridge Preservation or Reconstruction by Three-dimensional Analysis at Posterior Extraction Sites with Severe Bone Defects Using DBBM-C Collagen Membrane and PRF: A Prospective and Randomized Clinical Trial

Assessment of soft and hard tissue changes following micro crestal flap—Alveolar ridge preservation and augmentation at molar extraction sites in patients with stage III/IV periodontitis: A randomized controlled trial

Three-dimensional analysis of bone remodeling following ridge augmentation of compromised extraction sockets in periodontitis patients: A randomized controlled study

A randomized controlled clinical trial comparing small buccal dehiscence defects around dental implants treated with guided bone regeneration or left for spontaneous healing

Immediate Implant Placement with Simultaneous Bone Augmentation Versus Delayed Implant Placement Following Alveolar Ridge Preservation: A Clinical and Radiographic Study.

[A Prospective Cohort Study on the Effect of Implant Restoration Following Micro Crestal Flap-Alveolar Ridge Preservation at Molar Extraction Sockets with Severe Periodontitis].

Radiographic comparison of atelocollagen versus deproteinized bovine bone minerals covered with a collagen membrane in alveolar ridge preservation: a retrospective study