We use cookies to give you the best experience possible with our website and to improve our communication with you. We consider your selection and will only use the data you have approved us to gather.

These cookies help making a website usable by enabling basic functions like page navigation and access to secure areas of the website. The website cannot function properly without these cookies.

These cookies help website owners to understand how visitors interact with websites by collecting and reporting information anonymously. With this information we can constantly improve the experience we offer on our website.

These cookies are used to track visitors across websites. The intention is to display ads that are relevant and engaging for the individual user and thereby more valuable for publishers and third party advertisers.

Horizontal bone augmentation

Successful placement of implants in complete or partly edentulous patients requires sufficient alveolar ridge width. Horizontal bone augmentation increases ridge width.

Conventional approaches include screwing an autogenous bone block into remaining lingual/palatinal walls or stimulating new bone formation under form-stable membranes.

Autogenous bone blocks

Autogenous bone blocks are the material of choice to compensate insufficient bone width. Extensive resorption, however, can result in functional and aesthetic failures1.

Contouring the bone block with Geistlich Bio-Oss® and covering the augmented area with Geistlich Bio-Gide® considerably reduces graft shrinkage2.


Form-stable membranes

An alternative GBR approach to obtain more bone width uses form-stable titanium-reinforced membranes, which generate space for bone formation3. However, due to their material properties they are associated with impaired healing of the overlaying soft tissue and are non-resorbable, so require a second surgery for their removal4.

In order to overcome this complication, Geistlich Bio-Gide® can be used to completely immobilise and protect a particulated bone graft, thus leading to horizontal augmentations5:

  • Geistlich Bio-Gide® is fixed securely with pins on the lingual/palatinal and buccal side
  • Packed compactly with autogenous bone chips and Geistlich Bio-Oss® granules, creating a sausage skin effect
  • Graft material is completely immobilised and stable


Geistlich Bio-Gide® collagen membrane provides a viable replacement for non-resorbable barriers and does not require secondary surgery.


Yxoss CBR® - Individually made 3D Titanium Mesh

Larger and complex augmentations, especially with a combined horizontal-vertical defect morphology, still present a major surgical challenge. In these cases, the augmentation material requires a high level of regenerative ability, which can be achieved by mixing Geistlich Bio-Oss® and autologous bone. In addition, long-term stabilization of the augmentation material is necessary, which the ReOss® Customized Bone Regeneration (Yxoss CBR®) mesh structure can provide. The aim of this technique is to use the tried and tested material titanium in combination with modern CAD/CAM technology to achieve defect-specific, customized bone regeneration.


Advantages of Yxoss CBR® compared to conventional titanium mesh or titanium-reinforced membranes:

  • Customizing can lead to a shortened operation time and fewer complications, as there are no sharp edges or restoring forces.
  • Easier fixation - with one or two screws as needed - which is also possible in the coronal area.
  • Incorporating a pre-determined break point also makes removal of the titanium mesh easier.
  • The augmentation material can be determined individually in relation to autogenous bone and bone replacement.


  1. Maiorana C, et al. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2005 Feb;25(1):19–25 (Clinical study).
  2.  Maiorana C, et al.: Open Dent J. 2011 Apr 25;5:71-8 (Clinical study).
  3.  Schlegel KA et al.: Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003 Jan–Feb;18(1):53–8 (Preclinical study).
  4.  Jensen T et al., Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012 Mar;23(3):263–73 (Clinical study).
  5.  Proussaefs P, et al.: Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002; 17(2): 238-48 (Clinical study).
  6.  Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2006 Feb;26(1):43-51 (Clinical study).
  7.  von Arx T, Buser D: Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006 Aug;17(4):359–66 (Clinical study).
Verena Vermeulen
Group Lead Clinical Marketing