Clinical efficacy of grafting materials in alveolar ridge augmentation: A systematic review☆
Introduction
Oral rehabilitation frequently requires the repair of alveolar bone defects before prosthetic restoration can be achieved with acceptable long-term stability. The history of alveolar bone loss as well as the location and the extent of the resulting defects commonly determine the necessity and the strategy for defect repair. One of the most frequent reasons for reconstruction of the alveolar ridge is the lack of adequate bone volume for the placement of dental implants. Therefore, bone grafting procedures of the alveolar ridge are expected to provide sufficient bone height, bone width, and ridge contour for implant placement in order to provide favorable hygiene conditions for healthy periimplant tissues and satisfactory esthetics.
The use of autogenous bone grafts for ridge repair has been considered as the gold standard for obvious biological reasons (Bauer and Muschler, 2000, Reddi et al., 1987, Spin-Neto et al., 2013a). However, the surgical morbidity associated with graft procurement procedures has triggered countless attempts to avoid a second surgical site for graft procurement by using allografts, xenografts, or synthetic material to replace the lost alveolar bone. The market offers a confusing variety of commercially available grafting materials with different levels of scientific proof of their efficacy.
The ultimate goal for the use of bone grafting materials is the repair of bone to an extent that completely fills the defect and restores the former shape of the ridge. The ingrowth of bone into the grafting materials occurs through osteoconduction from the adjacent defect walls and follows the vascularization that invades the graft material. Hence, the structure and size of the graft as well as the defect geometry determine the extent of bony regeneration. As tissue ingrowth from the overlying soft tissue does not form bone in non-autogenous grafting materials (Bauer and Muschler, 2000, Merten HAG et al., 2003, Wiese and Merten, 1993, Wiltfang et al., 1997), the use of these materials is commonly combined with the use of barrier membranes that occlude the underlying defect from non-osseous tissue ingrowth, following the principles of guided bone regeneration.
The variety of grafting materials and the high number of possible combinations with membrane materials is increased by different preparations in terms of particle size and shape of the grafting materials. A systematic evaluation of this large array of variables is complicated by different defect geometries and augmentation techniques. A randomized controlled trial that could evaluate and compare such a matrix of variables in a comprehensive and systematic manner would be impossible to perform. However, countless reports of clinical and histological results from case series and cohort studies provide a large body of knowledge about the clinical performance of these materials that constitutes a kind of “community wisdom” and, if carefully reviewed, may provide valid information from which useful conclusions for clinical recommendations can be drawn. It is obvious that the validity of this compilation of results is limited by the heterogeneity of the included study designs and outcome parameters.
It was the idea of the present approach that a strict selection of studies with respect to quality of methodology, description of confounding parameters, and clear reporting of metric results would create a collection of objective data that would allow also for the application of basic statistical tests.
The aim of the present work was to assess the clinical efficacy of grafting materials in the reconstruction of the alveolar ridge through a systematic review with respect to clinically relevant parameters in different augmentation techniques and grafting materials.
Section snippets
Material and methods
This review was conducted and written with respect to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines (Liberati et al., 2009). The criteria of the Amstar and Glenny Scores were considered while conducting the search (Pieper et al., 2015, Zeng et al., 2015).
Results
An overview of the 184 publications included into this review is given in Fig. S1. To assess the value of the included reviews, the Amstar and Glenny scores were applied. The results can be seen in Fig. S1. The analysis considered 7473 applications of graft material in 6182 patients. The pattern of material use had changed over the observation period, with an initial preponderance for xenogeneic grafts that was more and more modified by the use of synthetic material and, even more in more
Discussion
The present review examines data from 184 studies on the use of grafting material for alveolar ridge reconstruction in conjunction with implant placement. The goal of this systematic review was to assess the clinical efficacy of grafting materials in the indication of periimplant dehiscence reconstruction on the one hand and vertical and horizontal augmentation of the alveolar ridge on the other.
The results obtained for the issue of “reconstruction of peri implant dehiscence defects” have shown
Conclusion
In conclusion, the present systematic review has shown that a satisfactory degree of defect fill in dehiscence defects of approximately 80% around implants can be achieved using grafting materials without any preference for their origin. Horizontal and vertical defects can be augmented predictably until a width/height of approximately 3.7 mm using particulate grafting material. The use of block-shaped grafts can improve the horizontal gain by approximately 1 mm, whereas significant improvement
Funding source
No external funding such as grants were used for this study.
Acknowledgment
The authors thank Ms. Susanne Ashrafi, Ms. Patricia Mathes, and Mr. Dietrich Meenen for their invaluable support in administrative and organization issues.
References (197)
- et al.
Maxillary alveolar ridge reconstruction with monocortical fresh-frozen bone blocks: a clinical, histological and histomorphometric study
J Cranio Maxill Facial Surg
(2012) - et al.
Surgical correction of horizontal bone defect using the lateral maxillary wall: outcomes of a retrospective study
J Oral Maxillofac Surg
(2014) - et al.
Deep-frozen allogeneic onlay bone grafts for reconstruction of atrophic maxillary alveolar ridges: a preliminary study
J Oral Maxillofac Surg: Off J Am Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg
(2009) - et al.
Horizontal augmentation of thin maxillary ridge with bovine particulate xenograft is stable during 500 days of follow-up: preliminary results of 12 consecutive patients
J Oral Maxillofac Surg
(2012) - et al.
Sandwich osteotomy for vertical and transversal augmentation of the posterior mandible
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg
(2010) - et al.
Forty sandwich osteotomies in atrophic mandibles: a retrospective study
J Oral Maxillofac Surg
(2011) - et al.
Reconstruction of the extremely atrophied mandible with iliac crest onlay grafts followed by two endosteal implants: a retrospective study with long-term follow-up
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg
(2014) - et al.
Lateral ridge augmentation using autografts and barrier membranes: a clinical study with 40 partially edentulous patients
J Oral Maxillofac Surg
(1996) - et al.
Tomographic evaluation of iliac crest bone grafting and the use of immediate temporary implants to the atrophic maxilla
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg
(2013) - et al.
Use of the sandwich osteotomy plus an interpositional allograft for vertical augmentation of the alveolar ridge
J Cranio Maxill Facial Surg
(2004)
Maxillary ridge augmentation with fresh-frozen bone allografts
J Oral Maxillofac Surg
Inlay-onlay grafting for three-dimensional reconstruction of the posterior atrophic maxilla with mandibular bone
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg
Reconstruction of the severely atrophic mandible using autologous calvarial bone graft: an ‘ inverted sandwich’ graft technique and dental rehabilitation with fixed implant-supported prostheses
J Cranio Maxill Facial Surg
Autogenous bone graft combined with polylactic polyglycolic acid polymer for treatment of dehiscence around immediate dental implants
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod
Alveolar segmental sandwich osteotomy for anterior maxillary vertical augmentation prior to implant placement
J Oral Maxillofac Surg
Alveolar distraction osteogenesis versus autogenous onlay bone graft for vertical augmentation of severely atrophied alveolar ridges after 12 years of long-term follow-up
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol
Alveolar sandwich osteotomy in resorbed alveolar ridge for dental implants: a 4-year prospective study
J Oral Maxillofac Surg
Simultaneous implant placement and bone grafting with particulate mineralized allograft in sites with buccal wall defects, a three-year follow-up and review of literature
J Cranio Maxill Facial Surg
Which hard tissue augmentation techniques are the most successful in furnishing bony support for implant placement?
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants
Augmentation procedures using bone substitute materials or autogenous bone – a systematic review and meta-analysis
Eur J Oral Implantol
Buccal plate regeneration with immediate postextraction implant placement and restoration: case reports
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent
The outcome of intraoral onlay block bone grafts on alveolar ridge augmentations: a systematic review
Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal
Block allograft technique versus standard guided bone regeneration: a randomized clinical trial
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res
Implant-guided vertical bone augmentation around extra-short implants for the management of severe bone atrophy
J Oral Implantol
Human maxillary sinuses augmented with mineralized, solvent-dehydrated bone allograft: a longitudinal case series
Implant Dent
Vertical ridge augmentation using xenogeneic material supported by a configured titanium mesh: clinicohistopathologic and histochemical study
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants
Clinical evaluation of 262 osseointegrated implants placed in sites grafted with calcium phosphosilicate putty: a retrospective study
J Oral Implantol
Calvarial autogenous bone graft for maxillary ridge and sinus reconstruction for rehabilitation with dental implants
J Oral Implantol
Bone graft materials. An overview of the basic science
Clin Orthop Relat Res
Retrospective success and survival rates of dental implants placed with simultaneous bone augmentation in partially edentulous patients
Clin Oral Implants Res
Clinical evaluation of particulate allogeneic with and without autogenous bone grafts and resorbable collagen membranes for bone augmentation of atrophic alveolar ridges
Clin Oral Implants Res
The use of freeze-dried bone allograft as an alternative to autogenous bone graft in the atrophic maxilla: a 3-year clinical follow-up
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent
A new technique for sandwich osteoplasty with interpositional bone grafts for fixation
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants
Ridge preservation with or without an osteoinductive allograft: a clinical, radiographic, micro-computed tomography, and histologic study evaluating dimensional changes and new bone formation of the alveolar ridge
J Periodontol
One versus two titanium screw fixation of autologous onlay bone grafts in the anterior maxilla: a randomised histological pilot study
Eur J Oral Implantol
Long-term stability of contour augmentation with early implant placement following single tooth extraction in the esthetic zone: a prospective, cross-sectional study in 41 patients with a 5- to 9-year follow-up
J Periodontol
Long-term stability of osseointegrated implants in augmented bone: a 5-year prospective study in partially edentulous patients
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent
Lateral alveolar ridge augmentation using tenting screws, acellular dermal matrix, and freeze-dried bone allograft alone or with particulate autogenous bone
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent
Vertical ridge augmentation around implants by e-PTFE titanium-reinforced membrane and bovine bone matrix: a 24- to 54-month study of 10 consecutive cases
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants
Vertical ridge augmentation with a collagen membrane, bovine bone mineral and fibrin sealer: clinical and histologic findings
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent
Alveolar ridge augmentation: a comparative longitudinal study between calvaria and iliac crest bone grafts
J Oral Implantol
Bone augmentation with TiMesh. Autologous bone versus autologous bone and bone substitutes. A systematic review
Annali di stomatologia
Guided bone regeneration around endosseous implants with anorganic bovine bone mineral. A randomized controlled trial comparing bioabsorbable versus non-resorbable barriers
J Periodontol
Analysis of complications following augmentation with cancellous block allografts
J Periodontol
Esthetic outcomes following immediate and early implant placement in the anterior maxilla–a systematic review
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants
Clinical outcome of autogenous bone blocks or guided bone regeneration with e-PTFE membranes for the reconstruction of narrow edentulous ridges
Clin Oral Implants Res
Fresh frozen versus autogenous iliac bone for the rehabilitation of the extremely atrophic maxilla with onlay grafts and endosseous implants: preliminary results of a prospective comparative study
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res
Alveolar distraction osteogenesis vs. vertical guided bone regeneration for the correction of vertically deficient edentulous ridges: a 1-3-year prospective study on humans
Clin Oral Implants Res
Autogenous onlay bone grafts vs. alveolar distraction osteogenesis for the correction of vertically deficient edentulous ridges: a 2-4-year prospective study on humans
Clin Oral Implants Res
Fresh-frozen bone allografts in maxillary ridge augmentation: histologic analysis
J Oral Implantol
Cited by (137)
Comprehensive repair of the alveolar cleft using cortical and cancellous bone layers: A retrospective study
2024, Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial SurgeryImproved ridge width with tenting screw bone augmentation using particulate and block grafts: A case report
2024, SAGE Open Medical Case Reports
Dr. Dr. Markus Troeltzsch and Dr. Dr. Matthias Troeltzsch contributed equally to this systematic review and share first authorship.
- ☆
The publication shall be attributed to the Department for Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Goettingen, Koch Str. 40, 37075 Goettingen, Germany.