We use cookies to give you the best experience possible with our website and to improve our communication with you. We consider your selection and will only use the data you have approved us to gather.

These cookies help making a website usable by enabling basic functions like page navigation and access to secure areas of the website. The website cannot function properly without these cookies.

These cookies help website owners to understand how visitors interact with websites by collecting and reporting information anonymously. With this information we can constantly improve the experience we offer on our website.

These cookies are used to track visitors across websites. The intention is to display ads that are relevant and engaging for the individual user and thereby more valuable for publishers and third party advertisers.

Vertical augmentation with RPMTM

Reinforce, Revascularize, Regenerate

Have you ever wanted to take advantage of a form-stable barrier membrane that allows for better vascularization of the underlying bone graft, as like with collagen membranes?

Titanium-reinforced polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) membranes are a well-documented off-the-shelf solution for vertical alveolar ridge augmentation in oral and maxillofacial bone regeneration1. They provide stability through the integrated titanium structure and provide a secluded space for undisturbed bone formation. However, classical PTFE membranes are occlusive membranes that do not allow vascularization from the periosteum. Early vascularization plays a central role in guided bone regeneration as angiogenesis is fundamental to new bone formation2,3,4. The novel Reinforced PTFE Mesh5, RPMTM, is characterized by perforations that allow vascularization from the periosteum.

  • Circular perforations of 660 microns (0.66mm) -> allowing proper graft vascularization from periosteum to bone graft
  • Titanium frame maintains space  -> essential for vertical bone augmentation6
  • PTFE allows easy trimming and adaptation -> thickness of 200 microns, the most inert & stable polymer in the biological system6

RPMTM combines the benefits of a stable scaffold and a PTFE barrier membrane, whilst allowing optimal supply of the bone graft through vascularisation from the periosteum to obtain vital bone. The concept and design of RPMTM was co-developed with Prof. Istvan Urban, Hungary/USA and reflects the same principles as the Sausage TechniqueTM 7, but for vertical alveolar ridge augmentation8.

«With the new RPMTM, I get as close as possible to the results of vital regenerated bone as with the Sausage TechniqueTM, but for vertical bone augmentation.»
Prof. Istvan Urban, Budapest, Hungary


RPMTM has distinct configurations:

  • Rectangular shapes
  • With predefined fixation points distinctly outside the defect area
  • For interproximal positioning


Selected shapes within the rectangular and interproximal portfolio are especially designed for the use in the mandible. The mandibular lingual side has mylohyoid muscle and vital anatomical landmarks9. Those shapes are characterized by a non-perforated area facing the lingual side and allow easy removal.



  1. Urban IA, et al: Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009, 24 (3), 502-10
  2. Schwarz F et al. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 2008;19(4): 402-415. (Pre-clinical study)
  3. Rothamel D et al. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 2005; 16(3): 369-378. (Pre-clinical study)
  4. Perelman-Karmon M et al. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2012 Aug;32(4):459-65. (Clinical study) 
  5. RPMTM is manufactured by Osteogenic Biomedical, Lubbock, Texas, USA
  6. Elgali I, et al: Eur J Oral Sci 2017; 125 (5), 315-337
  7. Urban IA, et al.: Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2013; 33(3): 299-307.
  8. Urban IA, et al.: Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014; 29(1): 185-93
  9. Urban IA, et al.: J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2017; 37(5):639-645 (clinical study) – review format of this reference
  10. Buser D et al., J Dent Res. 2013 Dec;92(12 Suppl):176S–82S (Clinical study).
  11. Urban IA et al., Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2015, 35(5):613-623 (clinical study) – review format of this reference
  12. Becker J et al. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009; 20(7):742-749. (Clinical study)
  13. Tal H et al. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008; 19(3) : 295-302. (Clinical study)
  14. Urban IA, et al Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2016, 36(3):329-337 (clinical study) review format of this reference