Literature DB >> 21834864

Clinical similarities and histological diversity comparing fresh frozen onlay bone blocks allografts and autografts in human maxillary reconstruction.

Rubens Spin-Neto1, Ricardo Andrés Landazuri Del Barrio, Luis Antonio Violin Dias Pereira, Rosemary Adriana Chiérici Marcantonio, Elcio Marcantonio, Elcio Marcantonio.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In the absence of autologous bone for harvesting, fresh-frozen bone allografts turned into an alternative for bone reconstruction procedures.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to make a histological analysis of fresh-frozen onlay bone allografts (ALs), compared with autografts, in patients who needed maxillary reconstruction prior to dental implants placement.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twelve patients with bone deficiencies (width inferior to 4 mm) in the sites where the implants were planned were enrolled in the study. From these, six were elected to be treated with autogenous (AT) bone grafts and six with fresh-frozen bone AL. This last group included the patients who had absence of a convenient amount of bone in donor sites. Each patient received from one to six graft blocks, totalling to 12 ATs and 17 ALs. Seven months after grafting procedures, biopsies of the grafts were made using 2-mm internal diameter trephine burs, and processed for histological analysis. One biopsy was retrieved from each patient.
RESULTS: Clinically, all grafts were found to be firm in consistency and well-incorporated to the receptor bed. Histological analysis showed a large amount of necrotic bone surrounded by few spots of new-formed bone in the AL group, suggesting low rate of graft remodeling. In the AT group, an advanced stage of bone remodeling was seen.
CONCLUSIONS: Human fresh-frozen bone block AL showed clinical compatibility for grafting procedures, although associated to slow remodeling process. Further studies are needed to define, at long term, the remodeling process chronology the clinical longitudinal results for fresh-frozen bone AL.
© 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  atrophic maxillae; bone allograft; histological analysis

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21834864     DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2011.00382.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Implant Dent Relat Res        ISSN: 1523-0899            Impact factor:   3.932


  10 in total

1.  Acellular mineralized allogenic block bone graft does not remodel during the 10 weeks following concurrent implant placement in a rabbit femoral model.

Authors:  D Joshua Cohen; Kayla M Scott; Aniket N Kulkarni; Jennifer S Wayne; Barbara D Boyan; Zvi Schwartz
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2019-10-10       Impact factor: 5.977

2.  Differences between buccal and lingual bone quality and quantity of peri-implant regions.

Authors:  Do-Gyoon Kim; Kathy L Elias; Yong-Hoon Jeong; Hyun-Jung Kwon; Matthew Clements; William A Brantley; Damian J Lee; Jung-Suk Han
Journal:  J Mech Behav Biomed Mater       Date:  2016-01-02

3.  Horizontal Resorption of Fresh-Frozen Corticocancellous Bone Blocks in the Reconstruction of the Atrophic Maxilla at 5 Months.

Authors:  Eugénio Pereira; Ana Messias; Ricardo Dias; Fernando Judas; Alexander Salvoni; Fernando Guerra
Journal:  Clin Implant Dent Relat Res       Date:  2014-10-27       Impact factor: 3.932

4.  Histochemical and morphological aspects of fresh frozen bone: a preliminary study.

Authors:  F S De Ponte; G Cutroneo; R Falzea; G Rizzo; L Catalfamo; A Favaloro; G Vermiglio; M Runci; A Centofanti; G Anastasi
Journal:  Eur J Histochem       Date:  2016-12-06       Impact factor: 3.188

5.  Clinical and histological evaluation of increase in the residual ridge width using mineralized corticocancellous block allografts: A pilot study.

Authors:  Reza Shahmohammadi; Amir Moeintaghavi; Mehrdad Radvar; Habibollah Ghanbari; Nasrollah Saghravanian; Shabnam Aghayan; Sara Sarvari
Journal:  J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects       Date:  2017-12-13

6.  Dental Implant Placement with Simultaneous Anterior Maxillary Reconstruction with Block and Particulate Fresh Frozen Allograft Bone: A Case Report with 24-Month Follow-Up Data.

Authors:  J S Vieira; E M Brandão-Filho; F R Deliberador; J C Zielak; A F Giovanini; T M Deliberador
Journal:  Case Rep Surg       Date:  2017-02-16

Review 7.  On the feasibility of utilizing allogeneic bone blocks for atrophic maxillary augmentation.

Authors:  Alberto Monje; Michael A Pikos; Hsun-Liang Chan; Fernando Suarez; Jordi Gargallo-Albiol; Federico Hernández-Alfaro; Pablo Galindo-Moreno; Hom-Lay Wang
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-09-11       Impact factor: 3.411

8.  Correlation between density and resorption of fresh-frozen and autogenous bone grafts.

Authors:  Simone Lumetti; Carlo Galli; Edoardo Manfredi; Ugo Consolo; Claudio Marchetti; Giulia Ghiacci; Andrea Toffoli; Mauro Bonanini; Attilio Salgarelli; Guido M Macaluso
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-06-24       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 9.  Horizontal Alveolar Ridge Augmentation with Allogeneic Bone Block Graft Compared with Autogenous Bone Block Graft: a Systematic Review.

Authors:  Thomas Starch-Jensen; Daniel Deluiz; Eduardo Muniz Barretto Tinoco
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Res       Date:  2020-03-31

Review 10.  Applications of Carbon Nanotubes in Bone Tissue Regeneration and Engineering: Superiority, Concerns, Current Advancements, and Prospects.

Authors:  Baoqing Pei; Wei Wang; Nicholas Dunne; Xiaoming Li
Journal:  Nanomaterials (Basel)       Date:  2019-10-22       Impact factor: 5.076

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.