Differences in Mechanical and Physicochemical Properties of Several PTFE Membranes Used in Guided Bone Regeneration

Non-resorbable PTFE membranes are frequently used in dental-guided bone regeneration (GBR). However, there is a lack of detailed comparative studies that define variations among commonly used PTFE membranes in daily dental clinical practice. The aim of this study was to examine differences in physicochemical and mechanical properties of several recent commercial PTFE membranes for dental GBR (Cytoplast (TM) TXT-200, permamem((R)), NeoGen((R)), Surgitime, OsseoGuard((R))-TXT, OsseoGuard((R))-NTXT). Such differences have been rarely recorded so far, which might be a reason for the varied clinical results. For that reason, we analyzed their surface architecture, chemical composition, tensile strength, Young's modulus, wettability, roughness, density, thickness and porosity. SEM revealed different microarchitectures among the non-textured membranes; the textured ones had hexagonal indentations and XPS indicated an identical spectral portfolio in all membranes. NeoGen((R)) was determined to be the strongest and OsseoGuard((R))-TXT was the most elastic. Wettability and roughness were highest for Surgitime but lowest for OsseoGuard((R))-NTXT. Furthermore, permamem((R)) was the thinnest and NeoGen((R)) was identified as the thickest investigated GBR membrane. The defect volumes and defect volume ratio (%) varied significantly, indicating that permamem(R) had the least imperfect structure, followed by NeoGen((R)) and then Cytoplast (TM) TXT-200. These differences may potentially affect the clinical outcomes of dental GBR procedures.