Gerardo Mendoza-Azpur1, Andres de la Fuente2, Elizabeth Chavez2, Erick Valdivia1, Ismael Khouly3,4. 1. Department of Periodontology, School of Dentistry, Universidad Científica del Sur, Lima, Peru. 2. Department of Implantology, School of Dentistry, Universidad Científica del Sur, Lima, Peru. 3. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, New York University College of Dentistry, New York, New York. 4. Bluestone Center for Clinical Research, New York University College of Dentistry, New York, New York.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To evaluate dimensional bone alterations following horizontal ridge augmentation using guided bone regeneration (GBR) with or without autogenous block graft (ABG) for the rehabilitation of atrophic jaws with dental implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Forty-two patients, with 42 severe horizontal bone atrophy sites in the maxilla or mandible were randomly assigned to two groups: ABG or GBR. The ABG group received a combination of ABG with particulate xenograft, covered by a collagen membrane, while the GBR group received particulate xenograft alone, covered by a collagen membrane. After 6-9 months of healing, implants were inserted. All implants were definitively restored 6 months after implant placement. Radiographic examination (cone-beam computed tomograms) was performed immediately after bone grafting procedure (T0), at 6 months (T6), and at 18 months (T18), to evaluate the amount of horizontal bone width (HBW) gain. Patient demographic information, amount of ridge width augmentation, implant survival, complications, and contributing factors were gathered and analyzed. RESULTS:Thirty-nine patients completed the study. Both groups developed enough bone ridge width for implant placement. A total of 65 implants were placed. Implant survival rate was 100% in both groups at T18. Mean increases in HBW amounted to 5.6 ± 1.35 mm in GBR sites and 4.8 ± 0.79 mm in ABG sites at T18. There was no statistically significant difference in HBW gain obtained in the GBR group when compared to the ABG group at 6 months (P = 0.26) or 18 months (P = 0.26). However, the ABG group had a statistically significant higher prevalence of sensory disturbances (P = 0.02) and hematomas (P = 0.002) compared to the GBR group. CONCLUSION: These findings indicated that either GBR with or without ABG is an effective approach in augmenting resorbed horizontal deficient ridges prior to implant placement. However, more complications may be seen with the use of ABG related to the donor sites.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: To evaluate dimensional bone alterations following horizontal ridge augmentation using guided bone regeneration (GBR) with or without autogenous block graft (ABG) for the rehabilitation of atrophic jaws with dental implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-two patients, with 42 severe horizontal bone atrophy sites in the maxilla or mandible were randomly assigned to two groups: ABG or GBR. The ABG group received a combination of ABG with particulate xenograft, covered by a collagen membrane, while the GBR group received particulate xenograft alone, covered by a collagen membrane. After 6-9 months of healing, implants were inserted. All implants were definitively restored 6 months after implant placement. Radiographic examination (cone-beam computed tomograms) was performed immediately after bone grafting procedure (T0), at 6 months (T6), and at 18 months (T18), to evaluate the amount of horizontal bone width (HBW) gain. Patient demographic information, amount of ridge width augmentation, implant survival, complications, and contributing factors were gathered and analyzed. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients completed the study. Both groups developed enough bone ridge width for implant placement. A total of 65 implants were placed. Implant survival rate was 100% in both groups at T18. Mean increases in HBW amounted to 5.6 ± 1.35 mm in GBR sites and 4.8 ± 0.79 mm in ABG sites at T18. There was no statistically significant difference in HBW gain obtained in the GBR group when compared to the ABG group at 6 months (P = 0.26) or 18 months (P = 0.26). However, the ABG group had a statistically significant higher prevalence of sensory disturbances (P = 0.02) and hematomas (P = 0.002) compared to the GBR group. CONCLUSION: These findings indicated that either GBR with or without ABG is an effective approach in augmenting resorbed horizontal deficient ridges prior to implant placement. However, more complications may be seen with the use of ABG related to the donor sites.
Authors: Marija Čandrlić; Matej Tomas; Matej Karl; Lucija Malešić; Aleksandar Včev; Željka Perić Kačarević; Marko Matijević Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2022-02-25 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Ilya L Tsiklin; Evgeniy I Pugachev; Alexandr V Kolsanov; Elena V Timchenko; Violetta V Boltovskaya; Pavel E Timchenko; Larisa T Volova Journal: Polymers (Basel) Date: 2022-02-26 Impact factor: 4.329
Authors: Ralf Smeets; Levi Matthies; Peter Windisch; Martin Gosau; Ronald Jung; Nadine Brodala; Martina Stefanini; Johannes Kleinheinz; Michael Payer; Anders Henningsen; Bilal Al-Nawas; Christian Knipfer Journal: Int J Implant Dent Date: 2022-05-09