الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 118 |  |  |
| | | from | 118 | | |
Abstract
Introduction: Bone graft substitutes are widely used in bone reconstructive surgeries, and the science of biomaterials has become one of the fastest growing scientific fields in recent years. The Aim of this study: The aim of the study is to evaluate clinically and radiographically biphasic calcium phosphate (BCP) versus calcium sulphate (CS) as an alloplastic graft material for bone augmentation during dental implant placement. Materials and methods: twelve patients with average age of 31 years were treated by dental implant in esthetic zone. Patients with in sufficient buccal bony wall (horizontal bone resorption). The patients divided equally into two groups, each group have six patients. group (A): received osteon II collagen (β-TCP: HA 70%:30%) with collagen type I. group (B): received Ethoss (β-TCP: CS 65%:35%). No membrane was used in both groups. All implants were evaluated clinically and radiographically immediate, 6 and 9 months postoperative (T0, T1 and T2). All clinical and radiographic parameters were subjected to statistical analysis. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in implant stability, peri-implant pocket depth and modified sulcus bleeding index between two groups along the evaluation intervals. No implant was lost and all patients showed favorable clinical and radiographic finding. Also, no significant decrease in bone width along evaluation intervals in both groups. Conclusion: There was no difference between using Osteon II collagen or Ethoss bone grafting materials during dental implant placement in horizontal bone defect, both facilitate the formation of good quality bone with minimal loss of bone width during healing period. Using Ethoss grafting material is more preferable due to the handling properties, fast hardening and binding the host site.