Comparison of two different augmentation techniques

Aim: This study aims to compare Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR) performed using autogenous block graft particulate autograft with xenograft from physicians’ and patients’ perspectives.Methods: 30 systemically healthy individuals participated in this study. GBR (GBR-BAX) was 15 of the patients (GBR-PAX) other patients. thickness recorded preoperatively 6th month postoperatively. Bleeding, hematoma, flap dehiscence, infection, paresthesia were evaluated. Patients requested record pain intensity swelling levels visual analog scale (VAS) on 3rd, 7th, 14th days after surgery. The also by a clinician cost surgery, time spent preparing patient for during fatigue physician resulting surgery determined.Results: Both GBR-BAX GBR-PAX provided significant bone gain. found similar. techniques caused similar pain, swelling, discomfort days. VAS results showed no differences terms discomfort. more time-consuming both preparation surgical period tiring but less costly compared GBR-PAX. Conclusion: Within limitation present study, plus gain complications, In efficacy, none two superior other; however, time-consuming, tiring, costly.