I case _ report were applied, and in 14 alveoli, granule sizes be- tween 1,000–2,000 µm were applied. On aver- age, 0.78 g Cerasorb® was used per patient. Membranes were used in 74 cases, mostly non- resorbable Tef-Gen membranes (53 cases, 66%). Exactly 21 patients were treated with re- sorbable membranes, and out of these, 20 (25%) with Epi-Guide® membranes and only 1 with a Bio-Gide® membrane. In 36 cases, the wound could be closed completely, and in 38 cases the membrane was exposed. There were 6 patients who were treated without using a mem- brane. The wound was closed with different su- ture materials, partially with resorbable and partially with non-resorbable materials. In 53 patients (66%) antibiotic medication was required, in 16 only preoperative, in 23 only postoperative, and in 14 pre- as well as postop- erative. The following antibiotics were used: Clindamycin in 23 cases and Azithromycin in 4 cases. The mean time of antibiotic medication was 6.3 days. [Figure 4a] á Coronal-apical bone loss after 3, 6 and 12 months as compared to the original findings on the OP day. [Figure 4b] á Bucco-lingual bone loss after 3, 6 and 12 months as compared to the original findings on the OP day. [Figure 5] á Global evaluation of the efficacy at the last point of observation. 26 I implants 1_ 2005 During the clinical check one to two weeks af- ter treatment, the healing of the soft tissues, the condition of the membranes, and the inflam- matory effects were observed. The healing of the soft tissues was rated ‘good’ to ‘very good’ in 87% of the cases (see Fig. 1), and there was no or only little inflammation in 81% of the cases. There were 67 patients (84%) who rinsed their mouth regularly, and 62 patients used solutions with CHX content. The membranes were removed after 1 to 12 weeks. The average retention period was 4.2 weeks. Two membranes had to be removed due to general infection (not caused by the mate- rial), one after only one day and the other after 5 days. After 3, 6 and, if required, 12 months, the sur- geons evaluated the clinical process and the bone regeneration, and compared the results to the status on the day of surgery. The number of participating patients decreased over the re- search period. After 3 months, 53 cases (66%) could be evaluated on the basis of general clin- ical specifications; after 6 months, 45 cases (59%); and after 12 months, 32 cases (40%). In some patients, effects such as redness, swelling, inflammation and dehiscence were observed after 3 months. These patients continued the treatment, and after 12 months these effects had disappeared completely (Fig. 2). The regeneration and resorption of the aug- mented granules were evaluated on the basis of the x-rays. After 12 months, granules were found in the x-rays of less than 30% of the cases (Fig. 3). The bone loss could be evaluated after 3 months in 43 cases (54%), after 6 months in 44 cases (55%), and after 12 months in 23 cases (29%). The coronal-apical bone resorption af- ter 12 months was less than 10% in most cases and below 20% in 95% of the cases, the bucco- lingual bone loss was mostly below 10% and, af- ter 12 months, less than 20% in 100% of the eval- uated cases (Figs. 4a, 4b). The success of the therapeutical measures and the tolerability of the procedures and materials used were evalu- ated on the last day of the observation period of the patient concerned. One to two weeks after the check-up, three patients failed to show up for follow-up and hence, an evaluation of the ef- fectiveness could not be made. In 88% of the cases, the efficacy of the thera- peutical measures was assessed as ‘good’ to ‘very good’ on the basis of the bone regeneration due to augmentation with Cerasorb® (Fig. 5). The tol- erability was also assessed globally. The evalua- tion showed that there were no complications such as allergic reactions, problems with wound healing or pain, etc. In 89% of the cases, the tol- erability was assessed as ‘good’ to ‘very good.’