Critical review on bone grafting during immediate implant placement

Alveolar ridge splitting and simvastatin loaded xenograft for guided bone regeneration and simultaneous implant placement: randomized controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

The present study goal was to assess clinically and radiographically using simvastatin (SMV) loaded xenograft for guided bone regeneration (GBR) around simultaneously placed implants with alveolar ridge splitting in patients with horizontally atrophic jaw defect.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Randomized distribution of the twenty-two patients into two groups (11 patients each) was performed. Group I participants received alveolar ride splitting (ARS) with GBR using SMV gel mixed bone graft and a barrier membrane with simultaneous implant placement. Group II received the same treatment protocol without SMV gel. At the baseline, 6- and 9-months post-surgery, clinical and radiological alterations were assessed.

RESULTS

Six months after therapy, PES records of group I were statistically significantly improved than those of group II (P < .001). Group I exhibited statistically significant expansion of the alveolar ridge over group II after 6 and 9 months (P < .001). When compared to group II over the evaluation interval between 6 and 9 months, group I demonstrated statistically substantially minimal loss of the mean marginal bone level (P < .001). At the 6- and 9-month observation periods, bone density gain was considerably higher in group I than that in group II (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Alveolar ridge splitting along with GBR-augmented SMV improve the clinical and radiographical outcomes around dental implant over GBR alone.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Augmenting GBR with SMV in alveolar ridge splitting could boost implant osseointegration and enhance peri-implant tissue changes.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT05020405.

Comparison between platelet rich fibrin as space filling material versus xenograft and alloplastic bone grafting materials in immediate implant placement: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of different gap filling materials in immediate implant in anterior and premolar regions of maxilla.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-six implants were inserted in patients seeking for replacement of non-restorable maxillary anterior and premolar teeth (esthetic zone) by immediate implant. Patients were randomly distributed into three equal groups, twelve implants in each group. Group 1 received Platelet Rich Fibrin (PRF) into the jumping distance, Group 2 received Xenograft into the jumping distance and Group 3 received Alloplastic bone grafting material into the jumping distance. Implant stability by measuring the changes in Resonance Frequency Analysis (RFA), peri-implant pocket depth, marginal bone loss and changes in buccal bone thickness were evaluated during follow up periods. All the clinical and radiographic data were subjected to statistical analysis by One Way ANOVA test and the Post Hoc Tukey test.

RESULTS

This study involved 19 female patients and 17 male patients who received 36 dental implants. There was no significant difference between the study groups regarding implant stability, peri-implant pocket depth and palatal bone loss, while there was a significant difference between PRF Group (Group 1) and the other Groups regarding buccal bone loss and changes in buccal bone thickness.

CONCLUSION

PRF can be used as a gap filling material in conjunction with immediate implant placement, but other bone grafting materials give superior result regarding buccal bone loss and changes in buccal bone thickness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was listed on www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov with registration number (NCT05878392) on 26/05/2023. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt, approved the current study in compliance with the seventh revision of the Helsinki Declaration in 2013 (A0103023OS).