Background: This review addressed the focused question of what is the predictability of vertical ridge augmentation techniques for patients, who were diagnosed with insufficient alveolar bone volume for the placement of dental implants. Material and Methods: A systematic online review of three main databases was performed between 1966 and 1 November 2007. Four groups of vertical bone augmentation techniques have been identified and evaluated: (1) guided bone regeneration, (2) distraction osteogenesis, (3) onlay bone grafting, and (4) an array of different techniques. Data extraction was based on the following outcomes: (a) success and failure rate of the procedure (vertical bone gain/loss), (b) complication rate of the procedure, and (c) implant survival, success and failure rate. Results: The initial search identified 189 papers from the electronic database. The review produced seven papers for GBR, 13 reporting distraction osteogenesis, five for onlay bone grafting and three describing different techniques. Conclusions: For the concept of vertical ridge augmentation to enable dental implant placement, there are clinical and histological data supporting its potential use. Given the confined number of investigators using these techniques and the low number of patient treatments reported in the literature, the generalizability of this approach is limited at this time.

Background and Aims Bone augmentation procedures to enable dental implant placement are frequently performed. The remit of this working group was to evaluate the current evidence on the efficacy of regenerative measures for the reconstruction of alveolar ridge defects. Material and Methods The discussions were based on four systematic reviews focusing on lateral bone augmentation with implant placement at a later stage, vertical bone augmentation, reconstructive treatment of peri‐implantitis associated defects, and long‐term results of lateral window sinus augmentation procedures. Results A substantial body of evidence supports lateral bone augmentation prior to implant placement as a predictable procedure in order to gain sufficient ridge width for implant placement. Also, vertical ridge augmentation procedures were in many studies shown to be effective in treating deficient alveolar ridges to allow for dental implant placement. However, for both procedures the rate of associated complications was high. The adjunctive benefit of reconstructive measures for the treatment of peri‐implantitis‐related bone defects has only been assessed in a few RCTs. Meta‐analyses demonstrated a benefit with regard to radiographic bone gain but not for clinical outcomes. Lateral window sinus floor augmentation was shown to be a reliable procedure in the long term for the partially and fully edentulous maxilla. Conclusions The evaluated bone augmentation procedures were proven to be effective for the reconstruction of alveolar ridge defects. However, some procedures are demanding and bear a higher risk for post‐operative complications.

This evidence should, however, be interpreted with caution as it is derived from four RCT's with limited sample size (ranging from 15 to 30 per group), limited follow-up and performed by the same research group.

The formation of even considerable amounts of bone following vertical ridge augmentation with GBR and implants was not accompanied by predictable osseointegration of the implants.