2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2015.06.151
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bone Augmented With Allograft Onlays for Implant Placement Could Be Comparable With Native Bone

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
27
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
1
27
0
Order By: Relevance
“…[13][14][15] Nevertheless, controversial results have been reported in the literature. While some authors reported encouraging results, [16][17][18] other studies described questionable data regarding to its resorption and long-term sequestration of the graft. [19][20][21][22][23] However, factors underlying bone graft resorption remain unclear, since they can be influenced by different variables as embryologic origin, characteristics of recipient site in terms of vascularization, mechanical stress and graft's microarchitecture.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…[13][14][15] Nevertheless, controversial results have been reported in the literature. While some authors reported encouraging results, [16][17][18] other studies described questionable data regarding to its resorption and long-term sequestration of the graft. [19][20][21][22][23] However, factors underlying bone graft resorption remain unclear, since they can be influenced by different variables as embryologic origin, characteristics of recipient site in terms of vascularization, mechanical stress and graft's microarchitecture.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nevertheless, controversial results have been reported in the literature. While some authors reported encouraging results, other studies described questionable data regarding to its resorption and long‐term sequestration of the graft …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This has resulted from the broad set of indications in which allografts function predictably and analogous to the surgical techniques established for autografts. Allogenic bone grafts also have an excellent safety profile, as a World Health Organization initiated study demonstrated no reports on transmission of any kind of infectious diseases associated with freeze‐dried bone allografts (FDBA) . Furthermore, the increasing demand for implant‐borne prosthesis is concordant with rising numbers of bone augmentation procedures, as these are often required to provide sufficient bone quantity prior to or with installation of a dental implant …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Allogenic bone grafts also have an excellent safety profile, as a World Health Organization initiated study demonstrated no reports on transmission of any kind of infectious diseases associated with freeze-dried bone allografts (FDBA). [24][25][26][27][28] Furthermore, the increasing demand for implant-borne prosthesis is concordant with rising numbers of bone augmentation procedures, as these are often required to provide sufficient bone quantity prior to or with installation of a dental implant. 5,6 Clinical data on the survival and success rates of allogenic bone blocks are excellent, ranging from 93.7% to 100%, however, allogenic bone blocks were reported to be more technique-sensitive and susceptible to infection when compared to autografts.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…53,54 We found that this material was able to accelerate bone healing and osseointegration. This type of biomaterial 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 (cell-and factor-free) is of great interest in bone regeneration because it allows more realistic translation to clinical application 31,55 Computerized micro-tomography (µ-CT) scans were performed on bone samples that were retrieved at different time points 3, 7 and 14 days after surgery for NMP treated and nontreated defects. At day 3, there was no visible difference on the µ-CT scans between the control and NMP group.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%