Demineralized bone matrix for repair and regeneration of maxillofacial defects: A narrative review

OBJECTIVES

Demineralized bone matrix (DBM) is a well-established bone graft material widely accepted by dentists and the public for its favorable osteoconductivity and osteoinductive potential. This article aimed to provide a narrative review of the current therapeutic applications and limitations of DBM in maxillofacial bone defects.

STUDY SELECTION, DATA, AND SOURCES

Randomized controlled trials, prospective or retrospective clinical studies, case series and reports, and systematic reviews. MEDLINE, PubMed, and Google Scholar were searched using keywords.

CONCLUSIONS

Some evidence supported the therapeutic application of DBM in periodontal intrabony defects, maxillary sinus lifts, ridge preservation, ridge augmentation, alveolar cleft repair, orthognathic surgery, and other regional maxillofacial bone defects. However, the limitations of DBM should be considered when using it, including potential low immunogenicity, instability of osteoinductive potential, handling of the graft material, and patient acceptance.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

With the increasing demand for the treatment of maxillofacial bone defects, DBM is likely to play a greater role as a promising bone graft material. Safe and effective combination treatment strategies and how to maintain a stable osteoinductive potential will be the future challenges of DBM research.

Accuracy and precision of 3D-printed implant surgical guides with different implant systems: An in vitro study

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Implant guided surgery systems promise implant placement accuracy and precision beyond straightforward nonguided surgery. Recently introduced in-office stereolithography systems allow clinicians to produce implant surgical guides themselves. However, different implant designs and osteotomy preparation protocols may produce accuracy and precision differences among the different implant systems.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this in vitro study was to measure the accuracy and precision of 3 implant systems, Tapered Internal implant system (BioHorizons) (BH), NobelReplace Conical (Nobel Biocare) (NB), and Tapered Screw-Vent (Zimmer Biomet) (ZB) when in-office fabricated surgical guides were used.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) data set of an unidentified patient missing a maxillary right central incisor and intraoral scans of the same patient were used as a model. A software program (3Shape Implant Studio) was used to plan the implant treatment with the 3 implant systems. Three implant surgical guides were fabricated by using a 3D printer (Form 2), and 30 casts were printed. A total of 10 implants for each system were placed in the dental casts by using the manufacturer's recommended guided surgery protocols. After implant placement, postoperative CBCT images were made. The CBCT cast and implant images were superimposed onto the treatment-planning image. The implant positions, mesiodistal, labiopalatal, and vertical, as well as implant angulations were measured in the labiolingual and mesiodistal planes. The displacements from the planning in each dimension were recorded. ANOVA with the Tukey adjusted post hoc pairwise comparisons were used to examine the accuracy and precision of the 3 implant systems (α=.05).

RESULTS

The overall implant displacements were -0.02 ±0.13 mm mesially (M), 0.07 ±0.14 mm distally (D), 0.43 ±0.57 mm labially (L), and 1.26 ±0.80 mm palatally (P); 1.20 ±3.01 mm vertically in the mesiodistal dimension (VMD); 0.69 ±2.03 mm vertically in the labiopalatal dimension (VLP); 1.69 ±1.02 degrees in mesiodistal angulation (AMD); and 1.56 ±0.92 degrees in labiopalatal angulation (ALP). Statistically significant differences (ANOVA) were found in M (P=.026), P (P=.001), VMD (P=.009), AMD (P=.001), and ALP (P=.001). ZB showed the most displacements in the M and vertical dimensions and the least displacements in the P angulation (P<.05), suggesting statistically significant differences among the M, VMD, VLP, AMD, and ALP. NB had the most M variation. ZB had the least P deviation. NB had the fewest vertical dimension variations but the most angulation variations.

CONCLUSIONS

Dimensional and angulation displacements of guided implant systems by in-office 3D-printed fabrication were within clinically acceptable limits: <0.1 mm in M-D, 0.5 to 1 mm in L-P, and 1 to 2 degrees in angulation. However, the vertical displacement can be as much as 2 to 3 mm. Different implant guided surgery systems have strengths and weaknesses as revealed in the dimensional and angulation implant displacements.

Retrospective analysis of porous tantalum trabecular metal-enhanced titanium dental implants

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

The design of porous tantalum trabecular metal-enhanced titanium (TM) dental implants promises improved osseointegration, especially when grafting materials such as demineralized bone matrix are used; however, studies are lacking.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare TM implants with conventional titanium alloy (Ti) implants with and without demineralized bone matrix in terms of peri-implant bone remodeling in the first year after implant loading.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A chart review was used for all patients receiving Tapered Screw-Vent Ti and TM implants. Implants were placed and restored by a single provider between 2011 and 2015. Peri-implant bone remodeling was compared by using a paired t test (α=.05).

RESULTS

A total of 82 patients received 205 implants, 44 TM and 161 Ti implants (control). No implants failed in the TM group (survival rate of 100%), and 3 implants in total, 1 immediate, failed in the Ti groups (survival rate of 98.1%). TM implants exhibited a 0.28-mm bone gain on average, whereas the control group demonstrated 0.20 mm of marginal bone loss after the first year of implant loading. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that the odds of having bone loss was 64% less (odds ratio: 0.36; 95% confidence interval: 0.14-0.94) in the TM group than in the Ti group after controlling for bone grafting, implant location, immediate placement, bone type, and pretreatment bone level.

CONCLUSIONS

TM implants exhibited less peri-implant bone loss than the control Ti implants.

* Roughness and Hydrophilicity as Osteogenic Biomimetic Surface Properties

Successful dental and orthopedic implant outcomes are determined by the degree of osseointegration. Over the last 60 years, endosseous implants have evolved to stimulate osteogenesis without the need for exogenous biologics such as bone morphogenetic proteins. An understanding of the interaction between cells and the physical characteristics of their environments has led to development of bioactive implants. Implant surfaces that mimic the inherent chemistry, topography, and wettability of native bone have shown to provide cells in the osteoblast lineage with the structural cues to promote tissue regeneration and net new bone formation. Studies show that attachment, proliferation, differentiation, and local factor production are sensitive to these implant surface characteristics. This review focuses on how surface properties, including chemistry, topography, and hydrophilicity, modulate protein adsorption, cell behavior, biological reactions, and signaling pathways in peri-implant bone tissue, allowing the development of true biomimetics that promote osseointegration by providing an environment suitable for osteogenesis.