A Clinical Evaluation of Proplast as a Periodontal Implant Material

F ive patients received a Proplast implant in combination two‐ and three‐wall osseous defects. In four of the cases the implant material was removed within 6 weeks due to failure to maintain primary closure over the Proplast and subsequent inflammation. One implant remained in place for 6 months with no apparent visual signs of inflammation. However, an 8 mm pocket remained, the area was reentered, and histologie sections made. The histologic sections revealed Proplast intermixed with bone, and the presence of foreign body giant cells.