Autogenous Bone and Bioactive Glass around Implants Placed Simultaneously with Ridge Splitting for the Treatment of Horizontal Bony Defects: A Randomised Clinical Trial

Comparison of the success rate and marginal bone loss of implants placed simultaneously with either bone expansion or ridge splitting in maxillary sites: a prospective non-randomized study

This study was performed to compare the amount of marginal bone loss (MBL) and the success rate of implants placed following maxillary ridge expansion with two surgical techniques. A non-randomized prospective study was designed. The patients underwent either bone expansion or ridge splitting, and simultaneous implant placement. The implants were loaded according to the delayed loading protocol with single crowns. Each study group included 35 implants placed in 31 patients. One year after loading, the implant success rate was 100 % in both groups. The median MBL was 1.00 mm in both groups (interquartile range 0.10 mm in the bone expansion group and 0.30 mm in the ridge splitting group) (no significant difference, P = 0.749). The median MBL around implants placed in sites with D2, D3, and D4 density bone was 1.40 mm, 1.00 mm, and 0.80 mm in the expansion group and 1.50 mm, 1.00 mm, and 0.85 mm in the splitting group, respectively. There was a significant difference in MBL between the different bone density types within both groups (P < 0.001). In conclusion, no significant difference in the amount of MBL or the success rate was observed between implants placed simultaneously with ridge splitting and those placed simultaneously with bone expansion, in the maxilla.

Alveolar ridge bone changes in patients treated with the split-crest technique with simultaneous implant placement: A retrospective longitudinal observational study

OBJECTIVES

To investigate long-term alveolar ridge bone changes in patients treated with the split-crest technique (SCT) with simultaneous implant placement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Alveolar ridge width (ARW) was measured with a caliper immediately before (ARW1) and after SCT (ARW2) with a caliper. Existing CBCT scans taken at least 5 years postoperatively were used to assess the healed ARW (ARWF), buccal bone thickness (BBT), and lingual/palatal bone thickness (L/PBT) at 0, 3, and 5 mm apically from implant platform level (IPL). The distance between IPL and buccal bone crest (IPL-BBC) was also measured. Findings were compared with Wilcoxon and Student's t tests (p < .05).

RESULTS

Records of thirty patients with 85 implants were included. Eleven patients (31 implants) presented CBCT scans taken in two separate occasions, resulting in 116 measurements. Tomographic follow-up ranged from 5 to 18 years (11.5 ± 4.18 years). Mean ARW increased from 3.2 ± 0.6 to 6.6 ± 0.48 mm after SCT, but significantly reduced overtime to 4.46 ± 0.83 mm (ARWF) (p < .0001). Mean BBT was 0.5 ± 0.9, 1.3 ± 0.9, and 2.0 ± 1.2 mm, while mean L/PBT was 0.9 ± 0.7, 1.6 ± 0.9, and 2.1 ± 1.0 mm at 0, 3, and 5 mm from IPL, respectively. IPL-BBC distance varied up to 8.7 mm (1.4 ± 2.0 mm), with 56/116 measurements (51/85 implants) showing IPL-BBC = 0 mm.

CONCLUSION

Although SCT with simultaneous implant placement can predictably increase ARW postoperatively, ARW tended to significantly reduce over time, due to reductions in BBT and L/PBT, especially coronally. Nonetheless, 60% of the implants still presented some buccal bone at IPL.

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.

Potentials of pure xenograft materials in maxillary ridge augmentation: A case series

Many patients require edentulous ridge augmentation for dental implant placement. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the results of maxillary edentulous ridge augmentation exclusively with xenograft materials with and without simultaneous sinus floor elevation. This study reports the data retrieved from the records of 16 patients. The treatment outcome was assessed at least 6 months, postoperatively. Paired samples t-test or Wilcoxon Signed Rank test was used to compare the pre-and postoperative ridge dimensions. Dental implants were placed simultaneously in 7 patients, while 9 patients underwent delayed implant placement. In total, 68 implants were placed, and 12 patients also underwent maxillary sinus floor augmentation. A significant bone gain was achieved in both horizontal and vertical dimensions of edentulous maxillary ridges (P < 0.001). Ridge width increased by an average of 4.35 ± 1.90 mm (95% CI: 3.84 to 4.85 mm) while ridge height in areas of sinus floor augmentation increased by 8.19 ± 2.91 mm (95% CI: 7.33 to 9.05 mm). Within the study limitations, it appears that maxillary ridge augmentation according to the guided bone regeneration (GBR) protocols with exclusive use of xenograft particulate materials can provide optimal bone quantity for dental implant placement.

Lateral augmentation of the jaw by the split expansion ridge technique. A critical review

Bone augmentation has become a routine procedure to enhance and/or repair a deficient or resorbed alveolar ridge for predictable and successful implant placement. The split expansion ridge i.e., the alveolar ridge splitting (ARS) procedure, is one of the less invasive procedures, and is characterized by minor morbidity. This would allow to widen narrow ridges in order to allow implant reconstruction in a sufficient bone volume. Its efficacy and long-term stability rely upon clinical opinions and long-term retrospective studies, while prospective comparative studies and randomized controlled trials are rare. This critical review presents the development of this technique, describes the surgical procedure, and provides technical notes and modifications. The learning curve and in-depth knowledge of the oral anatomy, as well as the recognition of incidence and management of complications are of utmost importance in the clinical application of the ARS procedure.

Effect of an "Autogenous Leukocyte Platelet-Rich Fibrin Tooth Graft" Combination around Immediately Placed Implants in Periodontally Compromised Sites: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Objective

Autogenous tooth bone graft (ATBG) was suggested as a source for bone grafting materials, especially as they have similar chemical composition to bone. This study goal was to assess the clinical and radiographic consequences of ATBG with or without L-PRF on bone deposition around immediate implants placed in periodontally hopeless sites.

Materials and Methods

26 patients, with periodontally diseased teeth, underwent random assignment to receive the surgical protocol either with L-PRF over ATBG around immediately inserted implants (test group) or without it (control group). Clinical examination was observed. Radiographically, bone changes horizontally and vertically to determine marginal bone loss (MBL) and mesiodistal bone changes were made at the base line and 6 and 9 months after implant insertion. Statistical analysis utilizing paired Student's t-test was used for comparing results within the same group, whereas an independent-sample t-test was used for intergroup variable comparison.

Results

All implants met the criteria of success without any complications at the follow-up period. Nonsignificant differences were detected between horizontal bone alterations in both groups at 6 and 9 months (P > .001). The test group showed statistically significant lower MBL than the control group (P < .001). The mesiodistal bone gain in the test group was significantly higher than that of the control group at the 6-month period (P < .001). The mesiodistal bone loss in the control group was significantly higher than that of the test group at the 9-month period (P < .001).

Conclusion

The ATBG- L-PRF combination therapy enhances new bone formation and appeared to be a favorable procedure with immediate implant placement, particularly in severe periodontitis cases.