4.4 Article

Lateral Ridge Augmentation Using Autogenous Block Grafts and Guided Bone Regeneration: A 10-Year Prospective Case Series Study

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/cid.12438

关键词

anorganic bovine bone mineral; autogenous block grafts; bone regeneration; bone remodeling; bone resorption; clinical trial; collagen membrane; cone beam computed tomography; dental implants; implant design; ridge augmentation

资金

  1. FDR Foundation, Basel, Switzerland

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundThe use of autogenous block grafts harvested from intraoral donor sites has proven to be effective for the reconstruction of horizontal bone defects. PurposeThe objective of this study was to analyze implant success and the rate of block graft resorption 10 years after ridge augmentation to elucidate contributing factors influencing graft maintenance. Materials and MethodsA staged horizontal block graft augmentation was performed in 52 implant sites exhibiting severe horizontal bone atrophy using autogenous block grafts protected by DBBM and collagen membranes. The crest width was assessed intraoperatively at surgery and at re-entry after 6 months. At the 10 year reexamination clinical and radiographic parameters were assessed using cone beam computed tomography. ResultsThe 10-year implant success rate amounted to 98.1%, with minimal peri-implant bone loss (-0.17 mm for the maxilla, -0.09 mm for the mandible). The surface resorption rate after 10 years was 7.7% (0.38 mm). Grafts originating from the chin demonstrated significantly better graft maintenance at 10 years compared to retromolar grafts. Recipient site and age had no significant impact on graft resorption, whereas females showed more bone loss at the 10-year examination. ConclusionsLateral ridge augmentation using autogenous block grafts and guided bone regeneration demonstrated a favorable success rate of 98.1% with minimal block graft resorption of 7.7% after 10 years. Modulating factors were origin of the graft and gender.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据