Literature DB >> 28291849

Vertical Ridge Augmentation in the Atrophic Mandible: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Basel Elnayef, Alberto Monje, Jordi Gargallo-Albiol, Pablo Galindo-Moreno, Hom-Lay Wang, Federico Hernández-Alfaro.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To systematically appraise the effectiveness/reliability of vertical ridge augmentation (VRA) in the atrophic mandible. Articles that addressed any one of the following four areas were included in this study: amount of VRA, implant survival (ISR) and success rates (SSR) in the area of newly regenerated bone, complication rate during the bone augmentation procedure, and bone resorption.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: An electronic literature search was conducted by two independent reviewers in several databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register databases for articles reporting VRA in the atrophic mandible via distraction osteogenesis (DO), inlay block grafting (IBG), onlay block grafting (OBG), and guided bone regeneration (GBR). For meta-analysis, two primary (VRA and ISR [%]) and two secondary outcomes were studied (SSR [%] and vertical bone resorption [VBR] [%}). Additionally, for qualitative assessment, complications (ie, causes of failure) were further extracted and comprehensively described.
RESULTS: Overall, 73 full-text papers were evaluated. Of these, 52 articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The weight mean (WM) of VRA (± SD) was 4.49 ± 0.33 mm (95% CI: 3.85 to 5.14 mm). It was most notable that DO involved greater VRA than IBG, and thus, significantly higher than GBR and OBG. The technique significantly influenced the mean VRA obtained (P < .001). Nonetheless, no technique showed superiority in terms of ISR or SSR. VBR and complications were shown to be minimized for GBR.
CONCLUSION: If ~ 4 mm of VRA is needed, any technique in optimum local and systemic conditions should be equally reliable in the atrophic mandible. However, when greater VRA is needed, DO and IBG have demonstrated accuracy. By means of complication and VBR rates, GBR was shown to have the lowest. For ISR and SSR, no statistical differences existed among all techniques. Controlled studies are needed to examine the long-term peri-implant bone fate and the frequency of biologic complications in each technique applied for the vertical augmentation of the atrophied mandible.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28291849     DOI: 10.11607/jomi.4861

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants        ISSN: 0882-2786            Impact factor:   2.804


  19 in total

Review 1.  Prosthetic Rehabilitation of the Partially Edentulous Atrophic Posterior Mandible with Short Implants (≤ 8 mm) Compared with the Sandwich Osteotomy and Delayed Placement of Standard Length Implants (> 8 mm): a Systematic Review.

Authors:  Thomas Starch-Jensen; Helle Baungaard Nielsen
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Res       Date:  2018-06-29

2.  Comparison of Short and Standard Implants in the Posterior Mandible: A 3D Analysis Using Finite Element Method.

Authors:  Allahyar Geramy; Amirreza Rokn; Abbasali Keshtkar; Abbas Monzavi; Hamid Mahmood Hashemi; Tahereh Bitaraf
Journal:  J Dent (Tehran)       Date:  2018-03

3.  Marginal and internal fit of 3D printed resin graft substitutes mimicking alveolar ridge augmentation: An in vitro pilot study.

Authors:  C C Stoop; K Chatzivasileiou; W E R Berkhout; D Wismeijer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-04-15       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Non-Autogenous Innovative Reconstruction Method Following Mandibulectomy.

Authors:  Bahaa Haj Yahya; Eli Rosenfeld; Gavriel Chaushu; Ilana Kaplan; Yehonantan Ben-Zvi; Yafit Hamzani
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2020-06-30       Impact factor: 2.430

5.  A new morphologic classification of the alveolar ridge after distraction osteogenesis in human patients. A 17 years retrospective case series study.

Authors:  J-M Somoza-Martín; A Vázquez-Casal; M Suárez-Cunqueiro; A García-García; P Gándara-Vila; M Pérez-Sayáns
Journal:  Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal       Date:  2021-05-01

Review 6.  Animal models of vertical bone augmentation (Review).

Authors:  Zepeng Zhang; Yaxin Gan; Yarong Guo; Xuguang Lu; Xianqi Li
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2021-06-30       Impact factor: 2.447

7.  High Potential of Bacterial Adhesion on Block Bone Graft Materials.

Authors:  Themistoklis Nisyrios; Lamprini Karygianni; Tobias Fretwurst; Katja Nelson; Elmar Hellwig; Rainer Schmelzeisen; Ali Al-Ahmad
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 3.623

8.  The adjuvant use of plasma rich in growth factors in the inferior alveolar nerve repositioning technique.

Authors:  Eduardo Anitua; Mohammad H Alkhraisat
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2019-12-12

9.  Bioactivating a bone substitute accelerates graft incorporation in a murine model of vertical ridge augmentation.

Authors:  Jinlong Chen; Xue Yuan; Zhijun Li; Daniel J Bahat; Jill A Helms
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2020-07-07       Impact factor: 5.304

Review 10.  Sport and Dental Traumatology: Surgical Solutions and Prevention.

Authors:  Lorenzo Mordini; Po Lee; Ricardo Lazaro; Roberto Biagi; Luca Giannetti
Journal:  Dent J (Basel)       Date:  2021-03-23
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.