When a tooth or teeth are extracted, a defect in the bony ridge often forms. This loss of bone may make it impossible to place a dental implant. Guided bone regeneration procedures are used to re-establish a bone dimension sufficient to place a dental implant. The primary objective of the study is to determine whether there is any difference in the gain of horizontal alveolar ridge width following guided bone regeneration surgery using a combined autogenous/allogenic particulate bone graft versus a particulate allograft alone. Autogenous bone has historically been considered the gold standard for alveolar ridge grafting; however, other materials including allografts and xenografts have also been used with excellent results. This study evaluates the potential benefits, or lack thereof, for using a combined autogenous/allograft approach versus an allograft alone. The investigators will clinically evaluate the efficacy of this technique and determine the difference in bone formation between groups following healing at 5 months by observing bone growth relative to heads of the tenting screws placed horizontally in the locations of greatest defect in the alveolar ridge. A biopsy of the healed site will be taken at the time of implant placement. The null hypothesis is that there will be no difference in the amount of horizontal ridge width gain at 5 months post-grafting between the two different grafting materials (allograft alone versus allograft combined with autogenous bone). Furthermore, the null hypothesis is that histologically, the combination graft (MinerOss®/particulate autograft) will have a similar percentage of vital bone present at 5 months compared to the allograft-alone group (MinerOss®).

Guided bone regeneration procedures are used to re-establish a bone dimension sufficient to place a dental implant. The primary objective of the study is to determine whether there is any difference in the gain of horizontal alveolar ridge width following guided bone regeneration surgery using a combined autogenous/allogenic particulate bone graft versus a particulate allograft alone. Autogenous bone has historically been considered the gold standard for alveolar ridge grafting; however, other materials including allografts and xenografts have also been used with excellent results. This study evaluates the potential benefits, or lack thereof, for using a combined autogenous/allograft approach versus an allograft alone. The investigators will clinically evaluate the efficacy of this technique and determine the difference in bone formation between groups following healing at 5 months by observing bone growth relative to heads of the tenting screws placed horizontally in the locations of greatest defect in the alveolar ridge. A biopsy of the healed site will be taken at the time of implant placement. The null hypothesis is that there will be no difference in the amount of horizontal ridge width gain at 5 months post-grafting between the two different grafting materials (allograft alone versus allograft combined with autogenous bone). Furthermore, the null hypothesis is that histologically, the combination graft (MinerOss®/particulate autograft) will have a similar percentage of vital bone present at 5 months compared to the allograft-alone group (MinerOss®).

Inclusion Criteria:

• subject with a partially edentulous ridge of the maxilla or mandible with at least one tooth-span in length and inadequate buccolingual dimension for dental implant placement as measured clinically and radiographically
• live within "catchment area" of 50 mile radius from San Antonio

Exclusion Criteria:

• unstable systemic disease (such as compromised immune system)
• patient taking steroids or other medications affecting bone metabolism
• patient with history of radiation therapy to head & neck
• history of previous ridge augmentation procedure or pathology at local jaw site
• smokers who smoke > 10 cigarettes per day