Cargando…

Comparison of allogeneic and autogenous bone grafts for augmentation of alveolar ridge defects—A 12‐month retrospective radiographic evaluation

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare three‐dimensional alterations following the use of autogenous versus allogeneic onlay grafts for augmentation at single tooth defects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Alveolar bone width at specific implant sites were assessed using sagittal and cross‐sectiona...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kloss, Frank R., Offermanns, Vincent, Kloss‐Brandstätter, Anita
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6282851/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30303581
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.13380
_version_ 1783379078830620672
author Kloss, Frank R.
Offermanns, Vincent
Kloss‐Brandstätter, Anita
author_facet Kloss, Frank R.
Offermanns, Vincent
Kloss‐Brandstätter, Anita
author_sort Kloss, Frank R.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare three‐dimensional alterations following the use of autogenous versus allogeneic onlay grafts for augmentation at single tooth defects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Alveolar bone width at specific implant sites were assessed using sagittal and cross‐sectional CBCT images prior grafting and at three subsequent time points. Twenty‐one patients received autogenous bone blocks harvested from the retromolar region and another 21 patients received freeze‐dried cancellous allogeneic bone blocks. RESULTS: The vertical and horizontal dimensions did not significantly differ between autogenous and allogeneic bone grafts at any time point. In addition, there were no statistically significant differences in graft remodeling rates between autogenous (mean shrinkage rate after 12 months: 12.5% ± 7.8%) and allogeneic onlay grafts (mean shrinkage rate after 12 months: 14.4% ± 9.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Freeze‐dried cancellous allogeneic bone blocks showed equivalent volumetric shrinkage rates as autogenous bone blocks when used for treating circumscribed bone defects classified as Type‐II to Type‐IV according to the ITI‐treatment guide categories. Therefore, it is not necessary to over‐contour the alveolar ridge when using allogeneic blocks for treating single tooth defects, but to apply the same procedure as when using autogenous blocks.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6282851
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62828512018-12-11 Comparison of allogeneic and autogenous bone grafts for augmentation of alveolar ridge defects—A 12‐month retrospective radiographic evaluation Kloss, Frank R. Offermanns, Vincent Kloss‐Brandstätter, Anita Clin Oral Implants Res Original Articles OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare three‐dimensional alterations following the use of autogenous versus allogeneic onlay grafts for augmentation at single tooth defects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Alveolar bone width at specific implant sites were assessed using sagittal and cross‐sectional CBCT images prior grafting and at three subsequent time points. Twenty‐one patients received autogenous bone blocks harvested from the retromolar region and another 21 patients received freeze‐dried cancellous allogeneic bone blocks. RESULTS: The vertical and horizontal dimensions did not significantly differ between autogenous and allogeneic bone grafts at any time point. In addition, there were no statistically significant differences in graft remodeling rates between autogenous (mean shrinkage rate after 12 months: 12.5% ± 7.8%) and allogeneic onlay grafts (mean shrinkage rate after 12 months: 14.4% ± 9.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Freeze‐dried cancellous allogeneic bone blocks showed equivalent volumetric shrinkage rates as autogenous bone blocks when used for treating circumscribed bone defects classified as Type‐II to Type‐IV according to the ITI‐treatment guide categories. Therefore, it is not necessary to over‐contour the alveolar ridge when using allogeneic blocks for treating single tooth defects, but to apply the same procedure as when using autogenous blocks. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018-10-31 2018-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6282851/ /pubmed/30303581 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.13380 Text en © 2018 The Authors. Clinical Oral Implants Research Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Kloss, Frank R.
Offermanns, Vincent
Kloss‐Brandstätter, Anita
Comparison of allogeneic and autogenous bone grafts for augmentation of alveolar ridge defects—A 12‐month retrospective radiographic evaluation
title Comparison of allogeneic and autogenous bone grafts for augmentation of alveolar ridge defects—A 12‐month retrospective radiographic evaluation
title_full Comparison of allogeneic and autogenous bone grafts for augmentation of alveolar ridge defects—A 12‐month retrospective radiographic evaluation
title_fullStr Comparison of allogeneic and autogenous bone grafts for augmentation of alveolar ridge defects—A 12‐month retrospective radiographic evaluation
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of allogeneic and autogenous bone grafts for augmentation of alveolar ridge defects—A 12‐month retrospective radiographic evaluation
title_short Comparison of allogeneic and autogenous bone grafts for augmentation of alveolar ridge defects—A 12‐month retrospective radiographic evaluation
title_sort comparison of allogeneic and autogenous bone grafts for augmentation of alveolar ridge defects—a 12‐month retrospective radiographic evaluation
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6282851/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30303581
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.13380
work_keys_str_mv AT klossfrankr comparisonofallogeneicandautogenousbonegraftsforaugmentationofalveolarridgedefectsa12monthretrospectiveradiographicevaluation
AT offermannsvincent comparisonofallogeneicandautogenousbonegraftsforaugmentationofalveolarridgedefectsa12monthretrospectiveradiographicevaluation
AT klossbrandstatteranita comparisonofallogeneicandautogenousbonegraftsforaugmentationofalveolarridgedefectsa12monthretrospectiveradiographicevaluation