Literature DB >> 24451333

Are there specific indications for the different alveolar bone augmentation procedures for implant placement? A systematic review.

I Milinkovic1, L Cordaro2.   

Abstract

Bone resorption following tooth loss often interferes with dental implant placement in a desired position, and requires additional bone augmentation procedures. Many techniques have been described to augment and reconstruct alveolar ridge width and height. The aim of this study was to systemically review whether there is evidence to provide indications for the various bone augmentation procedures based on defect dimension and type. An electronic search of the Medline database and Cochrane library, complemented by a manual search, was performed. Inclusion criteria for partial edentulism were: clinical trials on bone augmentation procedures in preparation or at the time of implant placement, reporting preoperative and postoperative dimensions of the ridge. For edentulous patients, studies were included when providing the data on ridge and defect description, or the amount of augmentation achieved. The search yielded 53 publications for partially edentulous patients and 15 publications for edentulous patients. The literature provides evidence that dehiscence and fenestrations can be treated successfully with guided bone regeneration (GBR) at the time of implant placement (mean implant survival rate (MISR) 92.2%, mean complication rate (MCR) 4.99%). In partially edentulous ridges, when a horizontal defect is present, procedures such as staged GBR (MISR 100%, MCR 11.9%), bone block grafts (MISR 98.4%, MCR 6.3%), and ridge expansion/splitting (MISR 97.4%, MCR 6.8%) have proved to be effective. Vertical defects can be treated with simultaneous and staged GBR (MISR 98.9%, MCR 13.1% and MISR 100%, MCR 6.95%, respectively), bone block grafts (MISR 96.3%, MCR 8.1%), and distraction osteogenesis (MISR 98.2%, MCR 22.4%). In edentulous patients, there is evidence that bone block grafts can be used (MISR 87.75%), and that Le Fort I osteotomies can be applied (MISR 87.9%), but associated with a high complication rate. The objective of extracting specific indications for each procedure could not be fully achieved due to the heterogeneity of the studies available. Further studies on bone augmentation procedures should report precise preoperative and postoperative measurements to enable a more exact analysis of the augmentation procedure, as well as to provide the clinician with the rationale for choosing the most indicated surgical approach.
Copyright © 2014 International Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  alveolar bone augmentation; dental implants; indications; systematic review

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24451333     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2013.12.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg        ISSN: 0901-5027            Impact factor:   2.789


  37 in total

1.  Human amniotic membrane for guided bone regeneration of calvarial defects in mice.

Authors:  Mathilde Fénelon; Olivier Chassande; Jérome Kalisky; Florelle Gindraux; Stéphanie Brun; Reine Bareille; Zoran Ivanovic; Jean-Christophe Fricain; Claudine Boiziau
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 3.896

2.  Facial and occlusal esthetic improvements of an adult skeletal Class III malocclusion using surgical, orthodontic, and implant treatment.

Authors:  Mauricio de Almeida Cardoso; Rafael Scaf de Molon; Erica Dorigatti de Avila; Fabio Pinto Guedes; Valter Antonio Ban Battilani Filho; Leopoldino Capelozza Filho; Marcio Aurelio Correa; Hugo Nary Filho
Journal:  Korean J Orthod       Date:  2016-01-25       Impact factor: 1.372

3.  Two bone blocks sandwich technique for horizontal reconstruction of severely atrophic alveolar ridge in anterior maxilla: A case report.

Authors:  Hai-Bin Xia; Yu-Feng Zhang; Bin Shi; Min Wang
Journal:  World J Clin Cases       Date:  2020-03-06       Impact factor: 1.337

Review 4.  Alveolar ridge reconstruction with titanium meshes: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Marco Rasia-dal Polo; Pier-Paolo Poli; Davide Rancitelli; Mario Beretta; Carlo Maiorana
Journal:  Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal       Date:  2014-11-01

5.  Hard and Soft Tissue Management of a Localized Alveolar Ridge Atrophy with Autogenous Sources and Biomaterials: A Challenging Clinical Case.

Authors:  C Maiorana; D Andreoni; P P Poli
Journal:  Case Rep Dent       Date:  2016-09-21

6.  Alveolar Ridge Reconstruction with Titanium Meshes and Simultaneous Implant Placement: A Retrospective, Multicenter Clinical Study.

Authors:  Raquel Zita Gomes; Andres Paraud Freixas; Chang-Hun Han; Sohueil Bechara; Isaac Tawil
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2016-11-23       Impact factor: 3.411

7.  Comparison of alveolar ridge splitting and autogenous onlay bone grafting to enable implant placement in patients with atrophic jaw bones.

Authors:  Gokhan Gurler; Cagri Delilbasi; Hasan Garip; Sukran Tufekcioglu
Journal:  Saudi Med J       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 1.484

8.  The use of autogeneous mandibular bone block grafts for reconstruction of alveolar defects.

Authors:  Doğan Dolanmaz; Alparslan Esen; Gülsün Yıldırım; Özgür İnan
Journal:  Ann Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2015 Jan-Jun

Review 9.  Long-term effects of vertical bone augmentation: a systematic review.

Authors:  Johan Anton Jochum Keestra; Obada Barry; Lianne de Jong; Gerhard Wahl
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2016 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.698

10.  Mucosal Perfusion Preservation by a Novel Shapeable Tissue Expander for Oral Reconstruction.

Authors:  Daria Barwinska; John Garner; Darrell D Davidson; Todd G Cook; George J Eckert; Sunil S Tholpady; Keith L March; Kinam Park; Clark T Barco
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2017-08-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.