Effect of Guided Bone Regeneration on Ridge Splitting With or Without Expansion in Adults: A Systematic Review.

Abstract

Background: Several modifications have been applied to the ridge splitting with or without expansion technique to allow for implant placement in the atrophic ridges. Some studies utilized guided bone regeneration and others not. Aim: This systematic review will try to present the different studies discussing the effects of conjunction of bone grafting materials and/or membranes or not with the ridge splitting with or without expansion for patients having insufficient bucco-palatal ridge width. Methods: A thorough PUBMED (Medline) and COCHRANE databases search in addition to hand-search of journals of relevance was performed on related terms in the period from 1992 to 2016 and resulted in 3247 titles of which 21 abstracts were selected and collected as full articles for further evaluation while the rest were excluded by title or abstract. According to the inclusion criteria 14 studies were included and discussed in this article. Results: Of the 14 studies included in the present study only one study (cohort-retrospective) compared ridge splitting with/without expansion technique alone and with guided bone regeneration. Twelve studies applied guided bone regeneration while three studies did not. Conclusion:The studies included in the present review showed high success and survival rates of implants placed in narrow ridges where ridge splitting and/or expansion technique were used with/without the application of guided bone regeneration. While the conjunction of guided bone regeneration with the ridge splitting and/or expansion technique showed more complications than using the technique alone. Studies included in the present study were of high or moderate risk of bias with only one randomized controlled clinical trial. So, the results of the present study should be reviewed cautiously.

Lateral augmentation of the jaw by the split expansion ridge technique. A critical review

“…A study with score from 7 to 9, has high quality, 4-6, high risk, and 0-3 very high risk of bias Two systematic reviews evaluated the ARS technique w/wo combining a lateral GBR procedure simultaneously. The first one 84 was retrieved in a Medline search and a Cochrane database up to 2016, and it identified 14 articles (only one RCT) 29 that met their inclusion criteria. There was no significant difference in outcome when GBR was added to the ARS technique.…”