Bulletin of Stomatology and Maxillofacial Surgery
ISSN 1829-006X
2025; 91–101
Shared with The Gufo

COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF CUSTOMIZED 3D TITANIUM MESH VERSUS TITANIUMREINFORCED DENSE POLYTETRAFLUOROETHYLENE(D-PTFE) MEMBRANE IN HORIZONTAL RIDGE AUGMENTATION USING CBCT– A PILOT STUDY

Manju Krishnan*, Anita Balaji, Ranjith Mar

Sree Balaji Dental College and Hospital · Sree balaji dental college and hospital,pallikarnai,Chennai

Received: 2026-04-10 · Published: 2025-12-05

© 2025 The Author(s) and the original publisher.

CC BY-NC 4.0 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Shared article.
Original title
COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF CUSTOMIZED 3D TITANIUM MESH VERSUS TITANIUMREINFORCED DENSE POLYTETRAFLUOROETHYLENE(D-PTFE) MEMBRANE IN HORIZONTAL RIDGE AUGMENTATION USING CBCT– A PILOT STUDY
Authors
Manju Krishnan, Anita Balaji, Ranjith Mar
Source journal
Bulletin of Stomatology and Maxillofacial Surgery
Published
2025-12-05
Licence
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International
Original
https://doi.org/10.58240/1829006X-2025.21.11-91

Abstract

Aim: The study aims to evaluate and compare bone width gain in horizontal ridge augmentation, using customized 3D titanium mesh and titanium-reinforced dense polytetrafluoroethylene membrane(d-PTFE) Material and methods: Six patients in total were recruited, three patients allocated to Group A (augmented with dPTFE), and three to Group B (with customized 3D titanium mesh). After 6 months; bone width gain, membrane exposure rates, surgical time, and soft tissue assessment by patient questionnaire were measured. Result: Significantly higher bone width gain was noted in Group B . Surgical time was higher in Group A. Both groups indicated predictable, acceptable healing outcomes and biocompatibility of the materials used. Conclusion: Both groups demonstrated satisfactory outcomes but a greater horizontal bone width gain was observed in Group B. Membrane exposure occurred in one patient from Group A during early healing; none noted in Group B. Surgical time was shorter in Group B, indicating efficiency and satisfactory healing. Patient-reported outcomes were favorable, with five out of six patients reporting satisfactory healing. Within the limitations of the study, both materials may be considered as promising options for ridge augmentation. Further studies with bigger sample sizes, arch-specific analysis, and long-term follow-up are required to substantiate these findings.
1 / ? 100% Open in new tab Download Cite

Loading the full text…

Download Follow Updates