Purpose: The authors' aim was to perform a histomorphometric study of the healing of bone defects created adjacent to titanium and hydroxyapatite (HA) -coated implants and covered with either a resorbable or a nonresorbable membrane in combination with different filler materials and to evaluate to what degree coating, membrane, and/or filler influenced the healing of the defects. Materials and Methods: Posterior teeth were extracted from the mandibles of 10 baboons, and 12 implants were placed in each animal in the edentulous areas. The implants were either titanium or HA-coated, the membranes were either Vicryl, Gore-Tex, or Resolut, and the filler was either demineralized freeze-dried bone (DFDB), autogenous bone, or Biocoral. The implants were observed for either 3, 6, 9, 12, or 18 months. The volume of newly generated tissue and the relative contribution of bone, marrow, and filler were evaluated, as was relative extension of resorption, formation, and quiescent surface. Results: The results indicated that autogenous bone is still the gold standard, but both the DFDB and Biocoral compared favorably to it. Both filler materials were being gradually replaced by bone; this process was not yet finished at 18 months postsurgery. Discussion: Since even the sterilization of DFDB cannot exclude the possibility of a disease transmission, it is important to find an appropriate substitute. Both filler and membranes contributed to the re-establishment of the original volume; better results were achieved with the Vicryl and Gore-Tex membranes than with the Resolut. Biocoral can be considered an effective material. Conclusion: A bony defect is not necessarily a contraindication for the placement of an implant. (More than 50 references.)