Esthetic Assessment Succeeding Anterior Atrophic Maxilla Augmentation with Cancellous Bone-Block Allograft and Late Restoration Loading

Specially designed and CAD/CAM manufactured allogeneic bone blocks using for augmentation of a highly atrophic maxilla show a stable base for an all-on-six treatment concept: a case report

Background

In terms of a highly atrophic maxilla, bone augmentation still remains very challenging. With the introduction of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) for allogeneic bone blocks, a new method for the treatment of bone deficiencies was created. This case report demonstrates the successful use of two specially designed and CAD/CAM manufactured allogeneic bone blocks for a full arch reconstruction of a highly atrophic maxilla with an all-on-six concept.

Case presentation

We report the case of a 55-year-old male patient with a highly atrophic maxilla and severe bone volume deficiencies in horizontal and vertical lines. In order to treat the defects, the surgeon decided to use a combination of two allogeneic bone blocks and two sinus floor augmentations. The bone blocks were fabricated from the data of a cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) using CAD/CAM technology. After the insertion of the two bone blocks and a healing period of 7 months, six dental implants were placed in terms of an all-on-six concept. The loading of the implants took place after an additional healing time of 7 months with a screw-retained prosthetic construction and with a milled titanium framework with acrylic veneers.

Conclusion

The presented procedure shows the importance of the precise design of CAD/CAM manufactured allogeneic bone blocks for the successful treatment of a highly atrophic maxilla. Proper soft-tissue management is one of the key factors to apply this method successfully.

Esthetic Assessment following Ridge Augmentation, Late Implant Placement and Immediate Esthetic Reconstruction of the Atrophic Anterior Maxilla

Purpose: Evaluate the esthetic outcome of ridge augmentation using cancellous bone-block allografts, late implant placement, and immediate loading in the atrophic anterior maxilla, by PES (pink esthetic score) and WES (white esthetic score) indexes. Materials and Methods: Retrospective cohort study. Inclusion criteria were bone loss of at least 3 mm horizontally and 3 mm vertically according to preliminary CBCT; ridge augmentation using cancellous bone-block allografts; six months later the implant insertion and immediately loaded. PES-WES index was used for esthetic assessment of soft tissues surrounding the final implant-supported prosthesis (ISP). Results: All twenty-five successive individuals were included. The mean follow-up was 12.1 ± 56 months (range, 42−90 months). The mean PES index and WES index were 7 ± 1.74 (range: 5−10) and 8.4 ± 2.12 (range: 5−10), respectively. The mean total combination of PES index and WES index (PES/WES) was 15.3 ± 2.85 (range: 12−20). All ISPs had an overall score >12 (the defined threshold of clinical acceptability). Conclusions: Ridge augmentation in the atrophic anterior maxilla using cancellous bone-block allografts and immediate loading allows a stable esthetic result of the soft and hard tissues over the years (follow-up of 42−90 months).

Survival Rates of Dental Implants in Autogenous and Allogeneic Bone Blocks: A Systematic Review

Background and Objectives: Preliminary studies emphasize the similar performance of autogenous bone blocks (AUBBs) and allogeneic bone blocks (ALBBs) in pre-implant surgery; however, most of these studies include limited subjects or hold a low level of evidence. The purpose of this review is to test the hypothesis of indifferent implant survival rates (ISRs) in AUBB and ALBB and determine the impact of various material-, surgery- and patient-related confounders and predictors. Materials and Methods: The national library of medicine (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica database (EMBASE) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were screened for studies reporting the ISRs of implants placed in AUBB and ALBB with ≥10 participants followed for ≥12 months from January 1995 to November 2021. The review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The risk of bias was assessed via several scoring tools, dependent on the study design. Means of sub-entities were presented as violin plots. Results: An electronic data search resulted in the identification of 9233 articles, of which 100 were included in the quantitative analysis. No significant difference (p = 0.54) was found between the ISR of AUBB (96.23 ± 5.27%; range: 75% to 100%; 2195 subjects, 6861 implants) and that of ALBB (97.66 ± 2.68%; range: 90.1% to 100%; 1202 subjects, 3434 implants). The ISR in AUBB was increased in blocks from intraoral as compared to extraoral donor sites (p = 0.0003), partially edentulous as compared to totally edentulous (p = 0.0002), as well as in patients younger than 45 as compared to those older (p = 0.044), cortical as compared to cortico-cancellous blocks (p = 0.005) and in delayed implantations within three months as compared to immediate implantations (p = 0.018). The ISR of ALBB was significantly increased in processed as compared to fresh-frozen ALBB (p = 0.004), but also in horizontal as compared to vertical augmentations (p = 0.009). Conclusions: The present findings widely emphasize the feasibility of achieving similar ISRs with AUBB and ALBB applied for pre-implant bone grafting. ISRs were negatively affected in sub-entities linked to more extensive augmentation procedures such as bone donor site and dentition status. The inclusion and pooling of literature with a low level of evidence, the absence of randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) comparing AUBB and ALBB and the limited count of comparative studies with short follow-ups increases the risk of bias and complicates data interpretation. Consequently, further long-term comparative studies are needed.