Anterior Maxilla Augmentation Using Palatal Bone Block with Platelet-Rich Fibrin: A Controlled Trial

Moussa, Mahmoud; El-Dahab, Omnia Abou; Nahass, Hani El

doi:10.11607/jomi.3926

Cited by 25 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the anterior maxilla, in particular, bone resorption following the loss of one or more teeth can result in a horizontal bone deficiency; such a deficiency can make the placement of dental implants difficult, also because the insertion of an implant in a thin maxillary alveolar ridge can cause major aesthetic problems [ 1 , 3 – 5 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Horizontal ridge reconstruction of the anterior maxilla using customized allogeneic bone blocks with a minimally invasive technique - a case series

Venet

Perriat

Mangano³

et al. 2017

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDifferent surgical procedures have been proposed to achieve horizontal ridge reconstruction of the anterior maxilla; all these procedures, however, require bone replacement materials to be adapted to the bone defect at the time of implantation, resulting in complex and time-consuming procedures. The purpose of this study was to describe how to use a 3D printed hardcopy model of the maxilla to prepare customized milled bone blocks, to be adapted on the bone defect areas using a minimally invasive subperiosteal tunneling technique.MethodsCone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images of the atrophic maxilla of six patients were acquired and modified into 3D reconstruction models. Data were transferred to a 3D printer and solid models were fabricated using autoclavable nylon polyamide. Before the surgery, freeze-dried cortico-cancellous blocks were manually milled and adapted on the 3D printed hardcopy models of the maxillary bone, in order to obtain customized allogeneic bone blocks.ResultsIn total, eleven onlay customized allogeneic bone grafts were prepared and implanted in 6 patients, using a minimally invasive subperiosteal tunneling technique. The scaffolds closely matched the shape of the defects: this reduced the operation time and contributed to good healing. The patients did not demonstrate adverse events such as inflammation, dehiscence or flap re-opening during the recovery period; however, one patient experienced scaffold resorption, which was likely caused by uncontrolled motion of the removable provisional prosthesis. Following a 6 month healing period, CBCT was used to assess graft integration, which was followed by insertion of implants into the augmented areas. Prosthetic restorations were placed 4 months later.ConclusionsThese observations suggest that customized bone allografts can be successfully used for horizontal ridge reconstruction of the anterior maxilla: patients demonstrated reduced morbidity and decreased total surgery time. Further studies on a larger sample of patients, with histologic evaluation and longer follow-up are needed to confirm the present observations.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Horizontal ridge reconstruction of the anterior maxilla using customized allogeneic bone blocks with a minimally invasive technique - a case series

Venet

Perriat

Mangano³

et al. 2017

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In an RCT, PRF significantly reduced the resorption of autologous palatal bone grafts used to treat horizontal maxillary alveolar ridge deficiencies (Moussa, El‐Dahab & El Nahass, ) (Appendix S5).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although few studies suggested that combined therapies where APCs were associated with grafts and/or cells were able to promote ridge augmentation (Cortellini et al., ; Eskan et al., ; Filho Cerruti et al., ; Marx et al., ; Moussa et al., ) and sinus augmentation (Anitua et al., ; Choukroun et al., ; Inchingolo et al., ; Kassolis & Reynolds, ; Poeschl et al., ; Riaz et al., ), RCTs are needed to clarify whether APCs are associated to a real clinical benefit and which APC performs better (Appendix S5 and S6).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of bioactive factors to enhance bone regeneration: A narrative review

Donos

Dereka

Calciolari

2019

J Clinic Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim This review critically appraises the available knowledge on the pre‐clinical and clinical use of bioactive factors for bone regeneration in the cranial and maxillofacial area. Materials and Methods The use of growth factors, amelogenins and autologous platelet concentrates (APCs) for bone regeneration was reviewed in a systematic manner. More specifically, pre‐clinical and clinical studies on ridge preservation, alveolar ridge augmentation, regeneration of peri‐implant defects and sinus augmentation models were considered. Results Amongst different bioactive factors, the highest pre‐clinical and clinical evidence of a positive effect on bone formation is associated with rhBMP‐2 and the lowest with amelogenins. While APCs seem to accelerate clinical healing and reduce postoperative discomfort, there is insufficient and contrasting evidence of a significant effect on hard tissue regeneration for the different clinical applications. Conclusions Although there is increasing evidence that bioactive factors might enhance the bone regeneration process, the great heterogeneity of the available studies and the limited number of RCTs do not allow to draw robust conclusions. Issues that still need to be investigated include the optimal carriers for bioactive agents (direct vs. indirect), the dosage, the timing of administration, as well as the possibility of combining different agents to promote synergistic effects.

show abstract

“…2 articles ( 30 , 31 , 32 ) were included, in which 2 patients were treated. The grants were used for the regeneration of a bone fenestration and for alveolar preservation.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alternative intraoral donor sites to the chin and mandibular body-ramus

Reininger¹,

Cobo-Vázquez²,

Rosenberg³

et al. 2017

J Clin Exp Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundProvide a review of alternative intraoral donor sites to the chin and body-ramus of the mandible that bring fewer complications and that may be used to regenerate small and medium defects.Material and MethodsA review was conducted using the search engine PUBMED and looking manually into scientific journals.ResultsFrom the 35 articles included, 6 corresponded to the coronoids, 3 corresponded to the zygomatic body, 5 corresponded to the anterior maxillary sinus wall, 3 corresponded to the zygomatic alveolar process, 2 corresponded to the incisive fossa, 2 corresponded to the anterior nasal spine, 2 corresponded to the palatal region, 5 corresponded to the tuberosity, and 7 corresponded to the palatal and mandibular tori.ConclusionsAlthough there are few complications described when using alternative intraoral donor sites, the main problem with these types of grafts is their scarce bone volume, with only the zygomatic body, anterior sinus wall, and palate sites being able to be used in medium defects. More clinical trials are necessary in order to evaluate the behavior of the alternative donor sites over time. Key words:Grafting, autologous bone, autografts, mandible, maxilla, palate hard, zygoma.

show abstract

Anterior Maxilla Augmentation Using Palatal Bone Block with Platelet-Rich Fibrin: A Controlled Trial

Cited by 25 publications

References 0 publications

Horizontal ridge reconstruction of the anterior maxilla using customized allogeneic bone blocks with a minimally invasive technique - a case series

Horizontal ridge reconstruction of the anterior maxilla using customized allogeneic bone blocks with a minimally invasive technique - a case series

The use of bioactive factors to enhance bone regeneration: A narrative review

Alternative intraoral donor sites to the chin and mandibular body-ramus

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About