Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Clinical outcomes following atrophic alveolar ridge reconstruction using collagenated xenogeneic bone block or autogenous bone block: One-year follow-up of a randomized controlled clinical.
Romito, Giuseppe Alexandre; Fonseca, Marcelo Augusto; Soares, Herbert Horiuti; de Oliveira Lazarin, Rafael; Sapata, Vitor Marques; Nishyama, Roger; Conde, Marina Clemente; Hammerle, Christoph Hans Franz; Schwarz, Frank; Villar, Cristina Cunha.
Afiliação
  • Romito GA; Discipline of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Fonseca MA; Discipline of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Soares HH; Discipline of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • de Oliveira Lazarin R; Discipline of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Sapata VM; Discipline of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Nishyama R; Discipline of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Conde MC; Discipline of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Hammerle CHF; Clinic of Reconstructive Dentistry, University of Zurich, Zürich, Switzerland.
  • Schwarz F; Department of Oral Surgery and Implantology, Carolinum, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.
  • Villar CC; Discipline of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
J Clin Periodontol ; 51(1): 14-23, 2024 01.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37846853
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.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Implantes Dentários / Aumento do Rebordo Alveolar Limite: Animals / Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Implantes Dentários / Aumento do Rebordo Alveolar Limite: Animals / Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article