Cargando…

Comparison of Bone Resorption Rates after Intraoral Block Bone and Guided Bone Regeneration Augmentation for the Reconstruction of Horizontally Deficient Maxillary Alveolar Ridges

Purpose. Bone atrophy after tooth loss may leave insufficient bone for implant placement. We compared volumetric changes after autogenous ramus block bone grafting (RBG) or guided bone regeneration (GBR) in horizontally deficient maxilla before implant placement. Materials and Methods. In this retro...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gultekin, B. Alper, Bedeloglu, Elcin, Kose, T. Emre, Mijiritsky, Eitan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5101362/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27847815
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/4987437
_version_ 1782466267355021312
author Gultekin, B. Alper
Bedeloglu, Elcin
Kose, T. Emre
Mijiritsky, Eitan
author_facet Gultekin, B. Alper
Bedeloglu, Elcin
Kose, T. Emre
Mijiritsky, Eitan
author_sort Gultekin, B. Alper
collection PubMed
description Purpose. Bone atrophy after tooth loss may leave insufficient bone for implant placement. We compared volumetric changes after autogenous ramus block bone grafting (RBG) or guided bone regeneration (GBR) in horizontally deficient maxilla before implant placement. Materials and Methods. In this retrospective study, volumetric changes at RBG or GBR graft sites were evaluated using cone-beam computed tomography. The primary outcome variable was the volumetric resorption rate. Secondary outcomes were bone gain, graft success, and implant insertion torque. Results. Twenty-four patients (28 grafted sites) were included (GBR, 15; RBG, 13). One patient (RBG) suffered mucosal dehiscence at the recipient site 6 weeks after surgery, which healed spontaneously. Mean volume reduction in the GBR and RBG groups was 12.48 ± 2.67% and 7.20 ± 1.40%, respectively. GBR resulted in significantly more bone resorption than RBG (P < 0.001). Mean horizontal bone gain and width after healing were significantly greater in the GBR than in the RBG group (P = 0.002 and 0.005, resp.). Implant torque was similar between groups (P > 0.05). Conclusions. Both RBG and GBR hard-tissue augmentation techniques provide adequate bone graft volume and stability for implant insertion. However, GBR causes greater resorption at maxillary augmented sites than RBG, which clinicians should consider during treatment planning.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5101362
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51013622016-11-15 Comparison of Bone Resorption Rates after Intraoral Block Bone and Guided Bone Regeneration Augmentation for the Reconstruction of Horizontally Deficient Maxillary Alveolar Ridges Gultekin, B. Alper Bedeloglu, Elcin Kose, T. Emre Mijiritsky, Eitan Biomed Res Int Clinical Study Purpose. Bone atrophy after tooth loss may leave insufficient bone for implant placement. We compared volumetric changes after autogenous ramus block bone grafting (RBG) or guided bone regeneration (GBR) in horizontally deficient maxilla before implant placement. Materials and Methods. In this retrospective study, volumetric changes at RBG or GBR graft sites were evaluated using cone-beam computed tomography. The primary outcome variable was the volumetric resorption rate. Secondary outcomes were bone gain, graft success, and implant insertion torque. Results. Twenty-four patients (28 grafted sites) were included (GBR, 15; RBG, 13). One patient (RBG) suffered mucosal dehiscence at the recipient site 6 weeks after surgery, which healed spontaneously. Mean volume reduction in the GBR and RBG groups was 12.48 ± 2.67% and 7.20 ± 1.40%, respectively. GBR resulted in significantly more bone resorption than RBG (P < 0.001). Mean horizontal bone gain and width after healing were significantly greater in the GBR than in the RBG group (P = 0.002 and 0.005, resp.). Implant torque was similar between groups (P > 0.05). Conclusions. Both RBG and GBR hard-tissue augmentation techniques provide adequate bone graft volume and stability for implant insertion. However, GBR causes greater resorption at maxillary augmented sites than RBG, which clinicians should consider during treatment planning. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2016 2016-10-26 /pmc/articles/PMC5101362/ /pubmed/27847815 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/4987437 Text en Copyright © 2016 B. Alper Gultekin et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Clinical Study
Gultekin, B. Alper
Bedeloglu, Elcin
Kose, T. Emre
Mijiritsky, Eitan
Comparison of Bone Resorption Rates after Intraoral Block Bone and Guided Bone Regeneration Augmentation for the Reconstruction of Horizontally Deficient Maxillary Alveolar Ridges
title Comparison of Bone Resorption Rates after Intraoral Block Bone and Guided Bone Regeneration Augmentation for the Reconstruction of Horizontally Deficient Maxillary Alveolar Ridges
title_full Comparison of Bone Resorption Rates after Intraoral Block Bone and Guided Bone Regeneration Augmentation for the Reconstruction of Horizontally Deficient Maxillary Alveolar Ridges
title_fullStr Comparison of Bone Resorption Rates after Intraoral Block Bone and Guided Bone Regeneration Augmentation for the Reconstruction of Horizontally Deficient Maxillary Alveolar Ridges
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Bone Resorption Rates after Intraoral Block Bone and Guided Bone Regeneration Augmentation for the Reconstruction of Horizontally Deficient Maxillary Alveolar Ridges
title_short Comparison of Bone Resorption Rates after Intraoral Block Bone and Guided Bone Regeneration Augmentation for the Reconstruction of Horizontally Deficient Maxillary Alveolar Ridges
title_sort comparison of bone resorption rates after intraoral block bone and guided bone regeneration augmentation for the reconstruction of horizontally deficient maxillary alveolar ridges
topic Clinical Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5101362/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27847815
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/4987437
work_keys_str_mv AT gultekinbalper comparisonofboneresorptionratesafterintraoralblockboneandguidedboneregenerationaugmentationforthereconstructionofhorizontallydeficientmaxillaryalveolarridges
AT bedelogluelcin comparisonofboneresorptionratesafterintraoralblockboneandguidedboneregenerationaugmentationforthereconstructionofhorizontallydeficientmaxillaryalveolarridges
AT kosetemre comparisonofboneresorptionratesafterintraoralblockboneandguidedboneregenerationaugmentationforthereconstructionofhorizontallydeficientmaxillaryalveolarridges
AT mijiritskyeitan comparisonofboneresorptionratesafterintraoralblockboneandguidedboneregenerationaugmentationforthereconstructionofhorizontallydeficientmaxillaryalveolarridges