Effect of the Lateral Bone Augmentation Procedure in Correcting Peri-Implant Bone Dehiscence Defects: A 7-Years Retrospective Study
Source abstract
Abstract
Guided bone regeneration (GBR) is a well-documented and widely-used dental surgical procedure for the treatment of various types of alveolar bone defects. The aim of the study was to evaluate the long-term effectiveness of the GBR procedure in correcting small peri-implant bone dehiscence using the xenogeneic deproteinized bovine bone mineral material and a xenogeneic native bilayer collagen membrane. The present study was designed as a retrospective study. Seventy-five bone-level tapered two-piece dental implants Conelog®, Camlog (Biotechnologies AG, Switzerland) were divided into two groups G1—no bone augmentation (no GBR)—44 implants and G2—bone augmentation (GBR)—31 implants. For both groups, the closed healing protocol with a primary wound closure was used. The incidence of peri-implantits was evaluated, the quantitative assessment of soft tissue thickness was performed using the ultrasound (USG) device, quantitative assessment of marginal bone loss (MBL) was done. The prevalence of peri-implantitis was 5.3%, with a three-fold increase in peri-implantitis comparing the groups without and with bone augmentation (G1 = 2.27%, G2 = 9.7%). The average keratinized gingiva thickness was 1.87 mm and did not differ significantly between groups. No statistically significant differences in MBL between G1 and G2 were found. When dividing patients by gender, no statistically significant differences were observed. When dividing patients by age groups, statistically significant differences were observed between the youngest and oldest groups of patients. Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that the use of xenogeneic bone and a xenogeneic collagen membrane in a GBR procedure can be recommended to correct small peri-implant bone dehiscence.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes · Periodontal Regeneration and Treatments · Bone Tissue Engineering Materials
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Dental Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Medical University of Wrocław, 50-425 Wrocław, Poland
Department of Orthodontics, TU Dresden, 01069 Dresden, Germany
Funding
Camlog Foundation · Wroclaw Medical University
References (52)
Show source-provided references
1. A Long-term Retrospective Analysis of Survival Rates of Implants in the Mandible10.11607/jomi.3910 ↗
2. Long-Term Outcomes of Dental Implants with a Titanium Plasma-Sprayed Surface: A 20-Year Prospective Case Series Study in Partially Edentulous Patients10.1111/cid.12056 ↗
3. Guided bone regeneration: Materials and biological mechanisms revisited10.1111/eos.12364 ↗
4. Bone Augmentation of the Edentulous Maxilla for Implant Placement: A Systematic Review10.11607/jomi.16suppl.g1 ↗
5. Guided Bone Regeneration: Biological principle and therapeutic applications10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01922.x ↗
6. Limitations and options using resorbable versus nonresorbable membranes for successful guided bone regeneration
7. A novel classification of bone graft materials10.1002/jbm.b.35029 ↗
8. A Review of Bone Substitutes10.1016/j.coms.2007.06.002 ↗
9. Sbricoli, L., Guazzo, R., Annunziata, M., Gobbato, L., Bressan, E., and Nastri, L. (2020). Selection of collagen membranes for bone regeneration: A literature review. Materials, 13.10.3390/ma13030786 ↗
10. Ren, Y., Fan, L., Alkildani, S., Liu, L., Emmert, S., Najman, S., Rimashevskiy, D., Schnettler, R., Jung, O., and Xiong, X. (2022). Barrier Membranes for Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR): A Focus on Recent Advances in Collagen Membranes. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 23.10.3390/ijms232314987 ↗
11. Wang, J., Wang, L., Zhou, Z., Lai, H., Xu, P., Liao, L., and Wei, J. (2016). Biodegradable polymer membranes applied in guided bone/tissue regeneration: A review. Polymers, 8.10.3390/polym8040115 ↗
12. Implant placement in the esthetic area: Criteria for positioning single and multiple implants10.1111/prd.12211 ↗
13. Clinical outcomes of GBR procedures to correct peri-implant dehiscences and fenestrations: A systematic review10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01781.x ↗
14. Soft tissue augmentation around dental implants with connective tissue graft (CTG) and xenogenic collagen matrix (XCM). 1-year randomized control trail10.1016/j.aanat.2020.151484 ↗
15. Hadzik, J., Błaszczyszyn, A., Gedrange, T., and Dominiak, M. (2023). Soft-Tissue Augmentation around Dental Implants with a Connective Tissue Graft (CTG) and Xenogeneic Collagen Matrix (CMX)—5-Year Follow-Up. J. Clin. Med., 12.10.3390/jcm12030924 ↗
16. Ultrasound assessment of soft tissue augmentation around implants in the aesthetic zone using a connective tissue graft and xenogeneic collagen matrix—1-year randomised follow-up10.1016/j.aanat.2017.11.003 ↗
17. Peri-implant diseases and conditions: Consensus report of workgroup 4 of the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases and Conditions10.1111/jcpe.12957 ↗
18. Frequency of bone graft in implant surgery10.1186/s40902-016-0064-2 ↗
19. Comparison of Autogenous Tooth Materials and Other Bone Grafts10.1007/s13770-021-00333-4 ↗
20. Three-Dimensional Bone Block Planning for Mandibular Sagittal Bone Defect Reconstruction10.1155/2020/8829288 ↗
21. Zhao, R., Yang, R., Cooper, P.R., Khurshid, Z., Shavandi, A., and Ratnayake, J. (2021). Bone grafts and substitutes in dentistry: A review of current trends and developments. Molecules, 26.10.3390/molecules26103007 ↗
22. The Fate of Lateral Ridge Augmentation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis10.11607/jomi.6290 ↗
23. Barbu, H.M., Iancu, S.A., Rapani, A., and Stacchi, C. (2021). Guided bone regeneration with concentrated growth factor enriched bone graft matrix (Sticky bone) vs. bone-shell technique in horizontal ridge augmentation: A retrospective study. J. Clin. Med., 10.10.3390/jcm10173953 ↗
24. Jain, G., Blaauw, D., and Chang, S. (2022). A Comparative Study of Two Bone Graft Substitutes–InterOss® Collagen and OCS-B Collagen®. J. Funct. Biomater., 13.10.3390/jfb13010028 ↗
25. What grafting materials produce greater alveolar ridge preservation after tooth extraction? A systematic review and network meta-analysis10.1016/j.jcms.2021.06.005 ↗
26. Maxillary sinus floor augmentation using bovine bone grafts with simultaneous implant placement: A 5-year prospective follow-up study10.1097/ID.0b013e3182386cbc ↗
27. Horizontal Ridge Augmentation with a Collagen Membrane and a Combination of Particulated Autogenous Bone and Anorganic Bovine Bone–Derived Mineral: A Prospective Case Series in 25 Patients10.11607/prd.1407 ↗
28. Horizontal guided bone regeneration on knife-edge ridges: A retrospective case–control pilot study comparing two surgical techniques10.1111/cid.13073 ↗
29. Selahi, D., Spiegel, M., Hadzik, J., Pitułaj, A., Michalak, F., Kubasiewicz-ross, P., and Dominiak, M. (2023). The Appliance of A-PRF and CGF in the Treatment of Impacted Mandibular Third Molar Extraction Sockets—Narrative Review. Appl. Sci., 13.10.3390/app13010165 ↗
30. Pietruszka, P., Chruścicka, I., Duś-Ilnicka, I., and Paradowska-Stolarz, A. (2021). PRP and PRF—Subgroups and Divisions When Used in Dentistry. J. Pers. Med., 11.10.3390/jpm11100944 ↗
31. Lateral ridge augmentation with Bio-Oss alone or Bio-Oss mixed with particulate autogenous bone graft: A systematic review10.1016/j.ijom.2017.03.008 ↗
32. Effects of lateral bone augmentation procedures on peri-implant health or disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis10.1111/clr.13126 ↗
33. Long-term results of implants treated with guided bone regeneration: A 5-year prospective study
34. Effect of lateral bone augmentation procedures in correcting peri-implant bone dehiscence and fenestration defects: A systematic review and network meta-analysis10.1111/cid.13078 ↗
35. Effect of alveolar ridge preservation interventions following tooth extraction: A systematic review and meta-analysis10.1111/jcpe.13057 ↗
36. The Influence of Different Grafting Materials on Alveolar Ridge Preservation: A Systematic Review10.5037/jomr.2019.10306 ↗
37. Evaluation of the three methods of bacterial decontamination on implants with three different surfaces10.17219/acem/112606 ↗
38. What is the prevalence of peri-implantitis? A systematic review and meta-analysis10.1186/s12903-022-02493-8 ↗
39. Effectiveness of Implant Therapy Analyzed in a Swedish Population: Prevalence of Peri-implantitis10.1177/0022034515608832 ↗
40. Prevalence and risk indicators for peri-implant diseases: A literature review10.1016/j.jdsr.2021.05.002 ↗
41. Skorik, Y.A., Puppi, D., Wiessner, A., Wassmann, T., Wiessner, J.M., Schubert, A., Wiechens, B., Hampe, T., and Bürgers, R. (2023). In Vivo Biofilm Formation on Novel PEEK, Titanium, and Zirconia Implant Abutment Materials. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 24.10.3390/ijms24021779 ↗
42. Hadzik, J., Kubasiewicz-Ross, P., Gębarowski, T., Waloszczyk, N., Maciej, A., Stolarczyk, A., Gedrange, T., Dominiak, M., Szajna, E., and Simka, W. (2023). An Experimental Anodized Titanium Surface for Transgingival Dental Implant Elements—Preliminary Report. J. Funct. Biomater., 14.10.3390/jfb14010034 ↗
43. Hadzik, J., Kubasiewicz-Ross, P., Simka, W., Gębarowski, T., Barg, E., Cieśla-Niechwiadowicz, A., Szajna, A.T., Szajna, E., Gedrange, T., and Kozakiewicz, M. (2022). Fractal Dimension and Texture Analysis in the Assessment of Experimental Laser-Induced Periodic Surface Structures (LIPSS) Dental Implant Surface-In Vitro Study Preliminary Report. Materials, 15.10.3390/ma15082713 ↗
44. Peri-implantitis prevalence, incidence rate, and risk factors: A study of electronic health records at a U.S. dental school10.1111/clr.13416 ↗
45. The influence of soft tissue thickness on crestal bone changes around implants: A 1-year prospective controlled clinical trial
46. Lissek, M., Boeker, M., and Happe, A. (2020). How thick is the oral mucosa around implants after augmentation with different materials: A systematic review of the effectiveness of substitute matrices in comparison to connective tissue grafts. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 21.10.3390/ijms21145043 ↗
47. Hadzik, J., Kubasiewicz-Ross, P., Nawrot-Hadzik, I., Gedrange, T., Pitułaj, A., and Dominiak, M. (2021). Short (6 mm) and regular dental implants in the posterior maxilla–7-years follow-up study. J. Clin. Med., 10.10.3390/jcm10050940 ↗
48. Influence of implant mucosal thickness on early bone loss: A systematic review with meta-analysis10.5051/jpis.1904440222 ↗
49. Comparative evaluation of the effectiveness of the implantation in the lateral part of the mandible between short tissue level (TE) and bone level (BL) implant systems10.1016/j.aanat.2017.05.008 ↗
50. The effect of implant-abutment junction position on crestal bone loss: A systematic review and meta-analysis10.1111/cid.12600 ↗
51. Makowiecki, A., Hadzik, J., Błaszczyszyn, A., Gedrange, T., and Dominiak, M. (2019). An evaluation of superhydrophilic surfaces of dental implants—A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Oral Health, 19.10.1186/s12903-019-0767-8 ↗
52. Influence of subcrestal implant placement compared with equicrestal position on the peri-implant hard and soft tissues around platform-switched implants: A systematic review and meta-analysis10.1007/s00784-017-2301-1 ↗