Horizontal ridge augmentation with guided bone regeneration using particulate xenogenic bone substitutes with or without autogenous block grafts: A randomized controlled trial.
bone regeneration
bone substitutes
bone transplantation
cone-beam computed tomography
dental implants
Journal
Clinical implant dentistry and related research
ISSN: 1708-8208
Titre abrégé: Clin Implant Dent Relat Res
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100888977
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2019
Aug 2019
Historique:
received:
28
06
2018
revised:
30
11
2018
accepted:
26
12
2018
pubmed:
19
3
2019
medline:
4
12
2019
entrez:
19
3
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
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. 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. 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. 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.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
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
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
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
CONCLUSIONS
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.
Substances chimiques
Bone Substitutes
0
Dental Implants
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
521-530Informations de copyright
© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Références
Araujo MG, Linder E, Lindhe J. Bio-Oss collagen in the buccal gap at immediate implants: a 6-month study in the dog. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22:1-8.
Bergman B, Carlsson GE. Clinical long-term study of complete denture wearers. J Prosthet Dent. 1985;53:56-61.
Atwood DA. Reduction of residual ridges: a major oral disease entity. J Prosthet Dent. 1971;26:266-279.
Araujo MG, Sukekava F, Wennstrom JL, Lindhe J. Ridge alterations following implant placement in fresh extraction sockets: an experimental study in the dog. J Clin Periodontol. 2005;32:645-652.
Aghaloo TL, Moy PK. Which hard tissue augmentation techniques are the most successful in furnishing bony support for implant placement? Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2007;22(suppl):49-70.
Hammerle CH, Jung RE, Feloutzis A. A systematic review of the survival of implants in bone sites augmented with barrier membranes (guided bone regeneration) in partially edentulous patients. J Clin Periodontol. 2002;29(suppl 3):226-231. discussion 232-223.
Bassetti MA, Bassetti RG, Bosshardt DD. The alveolar ridge splitting/expansion technique: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016;27:310-324.
Froum SJ, Rosenberg ES, Elian N, Tarnow D, Cho SC. Distraction osteogenesis for ridge augmentation: prevention and treatment of complications. thirty case reports. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2008;28:337-345.
Jensen SS, Terheyden H. Bone augmentation procedures in localized defects in the alveolar ridge: clinical results with different bone grafts and bone-substitute materials. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009;24(suppl):218-236.
Retzepi M, Donos N. Guided Bone Regeneration: biological principle and therapeutic applications. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2010;21:567-576.
Tessier P, Kawamoto H, Matthews D, et al. Autogenous bone grafts and bone substitutes--tools and techniques: I. A 20,000-case experience in maxillofacial and craniofacial surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2005;116:6S-24S. discussion 92S-94S.
Monje A, Monje F, Hernandez-Alfaro F, et al. Horizontal bone augmentation using autogenous block grafts and particulate xenograft in the severe atrophic maxillary anterior ridges: a cone-beam computerized tomography case series. J Oral Implantol. 2015;41:Spec No: 366-371.
Khoury FAA, Missika P. Bone Augmentation in Oral Implantology. Berlin, Germany: Quintessenz. 2007.
Keller EE, Van Roekel NB, Desjardins RP, Tolman DE. Prosthetic-surgical reconstruction of the severely resorbed maxilla with iliac bone grafting and tissue-integrated prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1987;2:155-165.
Marchena JM, Block MS, Stover JD. Tibial bone harvesting under intravenous sedation: morbidity and patient experiences. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2002;60:1151-1154.
Crespi R, Vinci R, Cappare P, Gherlone E, Romanos GE. Calvarial versus iliac crest for autologous bone graft material for a sinus lift procedure: a histomorphometric study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2007;22:527-532.
Acocella A, Bertolai R, Colafranceschi M, Sacco R. Clinical, histological and histomorphometric evaluation of the healing of mandibular ramus bone block grafts for alveolar ridge augmentation before implant placement. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2010;38:222-230.
Al-Nawas B, Schiegnitz E. Augmentation procedures using bone substitute materials or autogenous bone - a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2014;7(suppl 2):S219-S234.
Khojasteh A, Behnia H, Shayesteh YS, Morad G, Alikhasi M. Localized bone augmentation with cortical bone blocks tented over different particulate bone substitutes: a retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012;27:1481-1493.
Dahlin C, Linde A, Gottlow J, Nyman S. Healing of bone defects by guided tissue regeneration. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1988;81:672-676.
Chappuis V, Cavusoglu Y, Buser D, von Arx T. Lateral ridge augmentation using autogenous block grafts and guided bone regeneration: a 10-year prospective case series study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2017;19:85-96.
Cordaro L, Torsello F, Morcavallo S, di Torresanto VM. Effect of bovine bone and collagen membranes on healing of mandibular bone blocks: a prospective randomized controlled study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22:1145-1150.
Maiorana C, Beretta M, Salina S, Santoro F. Reduction of autogenous bone graft resorption by means of bio-oss coverage: a prospective study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2005;25:19-25.
von Arx T, Buser D. Horizontal ridge augmentation using autogenous block grafts and the guided bone regeneration technique with collagen membranes: a clinical study with 42 patients. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006;17:359-366.
Hernandez-Alfaro F, Sancho-Puchades M, Guijarro-Martinez R. Total reconstruction of the atrophic maxilla with intraoral bone grafts and biomaterials: a prospective clinical study with cone beam computed tomography validation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2013;28:241-251.
Gultekin BA, Bedeloglu E, Kose TE, Mijiritsky E. Comparison of bone resorption rates after intraoral block bone and guided bone regeneration augmentation for the reconstruction of horizontally deficient maxillary alveolar ridges. Biomed Res Int. 2016;2016:4987437.
Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Trials. 2010;11:32.
Cawood JI, Howell RA. A classification of the edentulous jaws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1988;17:232-236.
Misch CM. Comparison of intraoral donor sites for onlay grafting prior to implant placement. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1997;12:767-776.
Araujo MG, da Silva JC, de Mendonca AF, Lindhe J. Ridge alterations following grafting of fresh extraction sockets in man. A randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26:407-412.
Fortin T, Bosson JL, Coudert JL, Isidori M. Reliability of preoperative planning of an image-guided system for oral implant placement based on 3-dimensional images: an in vivo study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003;18:886-893.
Jung RE, Schneider D, Ganeles J, et al. Computer technology applications in surgical implant dentistry: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009;24(suppl):92-109.
Verdugo F, Simonian K, Frydman A, D'Addona A, Ponton J. Long-term block graft stability in thin periodontal biotype patients: a clinical and tomographic study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011;26:325-332.
Monje A, Monje F, Gonzalez-Garcia R, Galindo-Moreno P, Rodriguez-Salvanes F, Wang HL. Comparison between microcomputed tomography and cone-beam computed tomography radiologic bone to assess atrophic posterior maxilla density and microarchitecture. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014;25:723-728.
Arisan V, Karabuda ZC, Piskin B, Ozdemir T. Conventional multi-slice computed tomography (CT) and cone-beam CT (CBCT) for computer-aided implant placement. Part II: reliability of mucosa-supported stereolithographic guides. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2013;15:907-917.
Fatemitabar SA, Nikgoo A. Multichannel computed tomography versus cone-beam computed tomography: linear accuracy of in vitro measurements of the maxilla for implant placement. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010;25:499-505.
Maret D, Molinier F, Braga J, et al. Accuracy of 3D reconstructions based on cone beam computed tomography. J Dent Res. 2010;89:1465-1469.
Scarfe WC, Farman AG. What is cone-beam CT and how does it work? Dent Clin N Am. 2008;52:707-730,v.
Scarfe WC, Farman AG, Sukovic P. Clinical applications of cone-beam computed tomography in dental practice. J Can Dent Assoc. 2006;72:75-80.
Ziegler CM, Woertche R, Brief J, Hassfeld S. Clinical indications for digital volume tomography in oral and maxillofacial surgery. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2002;31:126-130.
Gonzalez-Garcia R, Monje F. The reliability of cone-beam computed tomography to assess bone density at dental implant recipient sites: a histomorphometric analysis by micro-CT. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013;24:871-879.
Antoun H, Sitbon JM, Martinez H, Missika P. A prospective randomized study comparing two techniques of bone augmentation: onlay graft alone or associated with a membrane. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2001;12:632-639.
Hammerle CH, Lang NP. Single stage surgery combining transmucosal implant placement with guided bone regeneration and bioresorbable materials. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2001;12:9-18.
Sanz-Sanchez I, Ortiz-Vigon A, Sanz-Martin I, Figuero E, Sanz M. Effectiveness of lateral bone augmentation on the alveolar crest dimension: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent Res. 2015;94:128S-142S.
Kusiak JF, Zins JE, Whitaker LA. The early revascularization of membranous bone. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1985;76:510-516.
Piette E, Alberius P, Samman N, Linde A. Experience with e-PTFE membrane application to bone grafting of cleft maxilla. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1995;24:327-332.
Chiapasco M, Abati S, Romeo E, Vogel G. Clinical outcome of autogenous bone blocks or guided bone regeneration with e-PTFE membranes for the reconstruction of narrow edentulous ridges. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1999;10:278-288.
Tawil G, El-Ghoule G, Mawla M. Clinical evaluation of a bilayered collagen membrane (Bio-Gide) supported by autografts in the treatment of bone defects around implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2001;16:857-863.
Chiapasco M, Zaniboni M, Boisco M. Augmentation procedures for the rehabilitation of deficient edentulous ridges with oral implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006;17(suppl 2):136-159.
Nkenke E, Neukam FW. Autogenous bone harvesting and grafting in advanced jaw resorption: morbidity, resorption and implant survival. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2014;7(suppl 2):S203-S217.
Khoury F, Hanser T. Mandibular bone block harvesting from the retromolar region: a 10-year prospective clinical study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015;30:688-697.
Pikos MA. Mandibular block autografts for alveolar ridge augmentation. Atlas Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2005;13:91-107.
Chiapasco M, Casentini P, Zaniboni M. Bone augmentation procedures in implant dentistry. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009;24(suppl):237-259.
Jensen SS, Aaboe M, Pinholt EM, Hjorting-Hansen E, Melsen F, Ruyter IE. Tissue reaction and material characteristics of four bone substitutes. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1996;11:55-66.
Araujo MG, Sonohara M, Hayacibara R, Cardaropoli G, Lindhe J. Lateral ridge augmentation by the use of grafts comprised of autologous bone or a biomaterial. An experiment in the dog. J Clin Periodontol. 2002;29:1122-1131.
von Arx T, Cochran DL, Schenk RK, Buser D. Evaluation of a prototype trilayer membrane (PTLM) for lateral ridge augmentation: an experimental study in the canine mandible. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2002;31:190-199.
Meloni SM, Jovanovic SA, Urban I, Canullo L, Pisano M, Tallarico M. Horizontal ridge augmentation using GBR with a native collagen membrane and 1:1 ratio of particulated xenograft and autologous bone: a 1-year prospective clinical study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2017;19:38-45.
Urban IA, Nagursky H, Lozada JL, Nagy K. Horizontal ridge augmentation with a collagen membrane and a combination of particulated autogenous bone and anorganic bovine bone-derived mineral: a prospective case series in 25 patients. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2013;33:299-307.
Hurzeler MB, Quinones CR, Morrison EC, Caffesse RG. Treatment of peri-implantitis using guided bone regeneration and bone grafts, alone or in combination, in beagle dogs. Part 1: Clinical findings and histologic observations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1995;10:474-484.