ABSTRACT
AIM: This investigation aimed to evaluate the 1-year survival of implants placed after staged lateral alveolar ridge augmentation using equine-derived collagenated xenogeneic bone blocks (CXBBs) or autogenous bone block (ABB). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty patients who underwent lateral augmentation in a previous trial were included. The primary outcome measure was implant survival at the 1-year follow-up, and secondary outcomes included implant success, peri-implant clinical and volumetric parameters, pink aesthetic scores (PES) and patient-reported outcome measures. Data analysis involved Fisher's exact test, the Mann-Whitney U-test and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: In this study, no late implant failures were observed. The cumulative survival rates were 78.6% for the CXBB group and 90.9% for the ABB group, with no difference between the groups. Similarly, the success rates were 53.6% and 63.6%, respectively, showing no significant difference. Peri-implant clinical and volumetric parameters indicated the presence of healthy peri-implant tissues surrounding implants placed in both CXBB- and ABB-augmented sites. PES were 8.5 and 11.0 for implants placed in CXBB- and ABB-augmented sites, respectively. Furthermore, patient satisfaction rates were high and similar between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Dental implants placed in both CXBB- and ABB-augmented ridges demonstrated no statistically significant differences in clinical, volumetric and aesthetic outcomes, along with high patient satisfaction rates.
Subject(s)
Alveolar Ridge Augmentation , Dental Implants , Animals , Humans , Alveolar Process/surgery , Alveolar Process/pathology , Atrophy/pathology , Bone Transplantation , Dental Implantation, Endosseous , Esthetics, Dental , Follow-Up Studies , Horses , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
AIM: To compare, at different levels from the alveolar crest, the radiographic outcomes of equine-derived collagenated xenogeneic bone blocks (CXBB) and autogenous bone blocks (ABB) used for lateral alveolar ridge augmentation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-four patients with tooth gaps in atrophic alveolar ridges with ≤4 mm were randomly assigned to lateral augmentation using CXBB or ABB. The lateral bone thickness (LBT) was measured 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 mm below the alveolar crest using CBCT scans obtained before augmentation surgery and at 30 weeks, prior to implant placement. Statistical analysis was performed using Shapiro-Wilk, Fisher's exact, Mann-Whitney, and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. RESULTS: Both CXBB and ABB resulted in significant total and buccal LBT gains at 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 mm. LBT gains were similar between CXBB- and ABB-augmented sites, except for greater buccal LBT gains at 8 mm at CXBB-augmented sites. While ABB-augmented sites gained vertical bone height, CXBB-treated sites suffered vertical bone loss (CXBB: -0.16 mm; ABB: 0.38 mm, p < .0009). CONCLUSIONS: CXBB and ABB were both associated with significant and similar LBT gains at 30 weeks.
Subject(s)
Alveolar Ridge Augmentation , Dental Implantation, Endosseous , Animals , Horses , Dental Implantation, Endosseous/methods , Bone Transplantation/methods , Alveolar Process/diagnostic imaging , Alveolar Process/surgery , Alveolar Ridge Augmentation/methods , Guided Tissue Regeneration, Periodontal/methodsABSTRACT
AIM: To compare the efficacy of equine-derived collagenated xenogeneic bone blocks (CXBB) and autogenous bone block (ABB) for lateral alveolar ridge augmentation and two-stage implant placement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-four patients with tooth gaps up to four teeth and atrophic alveolar ridges with ≤4 mm were randomly assigned to lateral augmentation using CXBB or ABB. Lateral bone thickness (LBT) was measured 2 mm below the alveolar crest at augmentation surgery and 30 weeks later at implant placement. Implant-related outcomes, adverse events, surgery duration, pain sensation, analgesic consumption, and oral health-related quality of life were also assessed. Data were analysed using Fisher's exact, Mann-Whitney, and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. RESULTS: At 30 weeks, the median change in LBT amounted to 2.90 (CXBB) and 3.00 (ABB), respectively. Secondary endpoints demonstrated similar results for CXBB and ABB in terms of possibility to place an implant, need to perform a secondary bone augmentation at implant placement and rate of complications. Early implant failure was 20% for CXBB and 10% for ABB, with no difference between the groups. Pain scores and post-operative consumption of analgesics were significantly lower in the CXBB group than in the ABB group, especially during the first days post-surgery. CONCLUSIONS: CXBB is non-inferior to ABB for horizontal alveolar ridge augmentation and two-stage implant placement.
Subject(s)
Alveolar Ridge Augmentation , Dental Implantation, Endosseous , Alveolar Process/surgery , Alveolar Ridge Augmentation/methods , Animals , Bone Transplantation/methods , Dental Implantation, Endosseous/methods , Horses , Pain/etiology , Quality of LifeABSTRACT
AIM: To compare tissue changes at implant sites previously treated with two biomaterials for alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) in the aesthetic zone, 1 year after restoration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-six participants were treated with ARP using demineralized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) or DBBM +10% of collagen (DBBM-C), both covered with a collagen matrix (CM). Dental implants were placed, and definitive crowns were installed. Silicon impressions were taken before tooth extraction (T0), 2 weeks after crown insertion (T1) and 1 year after restoration (T2). Mid-facial mucosal level change (MLC), soft tissue thickness changes (TT), and marginal bone loss (MBL) were analysed using inter-group comparisons. RESULTS: Fifty-four participants were included in the analysis. The mid-facial level change between T0-T1 and T1-T2 showed no statistical difference between DBBM and DBBM-C. Between T0 and T1 for soft tissue thickness, DBBM performed significantly better at 3 and 5 mm below the mucosal margin. From T1 to T2, no significant differences between groups were found at any level for soft tissue thickness and MBL. CONCLUSION: At the aesthetic zone, advanced recession from tooth extraction to crown placement can be expected at sites treated with ARP regardless of biomaterial used. However, after crown insertion, tissue stability can be predicted.