Clinical Outcome of Implant Placement with Xenograft Augmentation
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objective: Exposed implant threads with good primary stability are common condition in implant dentistry practice. This issue is usually corrected with various types of bone substitutes, including xenografts. However, many complications, such as graft displacement and foreign body reaction, have been reported. The objective of the study was to evaluate clinical and radiographic outcomes, as well as the patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) of patients receiving implant placement with xenograft augmentation.
Materials and Methods: The patients who received implant placement with xenograft augmentation at Dental Implant Clinic, Faculty of Dentistry, Bangkokthonburi University, over 6 to 12-month period were included in this study. Clinical examinations were performed and PROM Functional and Esthetic Questionnaires were used to evaluate the clinical outcomes. Cone beam CT was also used to evaluate surrounding bone volume three-dimensionally. The percentage of bone gain was calculated using adjacent tooth’s cemento-enamel junction as reference point. Descriptive statistics were used to demonstrate all data.
Results: For the results, from clinical evaluation, all 36 implants in 18 patients were clinically successful with no mobility, symptom or history of infection. From PROM evaluation, 94.4% of patient could intake regular food, whereas 33.3% had problems about food impaction. All of patients were satisfied in the esthetic outcomes. Radiographic evaluation showed that the percentages of bone gain at the buccal, mesial and distal aspects were 45.4 ± 17.6%, 37.4 ± 19.5% and 35.9 ± 16.4%, respectively.
Conclusion: For conclusion, during the short follow-up period, good clinical, PROM and radiographic outcomes were achieved with implant placement combined with xenograft augmentation. The results are consistent with previous short-term studies. Compared with other bone substitutes, xenografts have low turn-over rate property which lead to stable bone levels, as well as good functional and esthetic outcomes. However, long-term follow up is suggested in this group of patients.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
บทความ ข้อมูล เนื้อหา รูปภาพ ฯลฯ ที่ได้รับการลงตีพิมพ์ในวิทยาสารทันตแพทยศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยขอนแก่นถือเป็นลิขสิทธิ์เฉพาะของคณะทันตแพทยศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยขอนแก่น หากบุคคลหรือหน่วยงานใดต้องการนำทั้งหมดหรือส่วนหนึ่งส่วนใดไปเผยแพร่ต่อหรือเพื่อกระทำการใด ๆ จะต้องได้รับอนุญาตเป็นลายลักษณ์อักษร จากคณะทันตแพทยศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยขอนแก่นก่อนเท่านั้น
References
Moraschini V, da C Poubel LA, Ferreira VF, Barboza ESP. Evaluation of survival and success rates of dental implants reported in longitudinal studies with a follow-up period of at least 10 years: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015;44(3):377-88.
Murray G, Holden R, Roachlau W: Experimental and clinical study of new growth of bone in a cavity. Am J Surg. 1957:93(3):385–7.
Buser D, Bragger U, Lang NP, Nyman S. Regeneration and enlargement of jaw bone using guided tissue regeneration. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1990;1(1):22-32.
Dahlin C, Gottlow J, Linde A, Nyman S. Healing of maxillary and mandibular bone defects using a membrane technique. Scand J Plast Reconstr Hand Surg. 1990;24(1):13-9.
Devina AA, Halim FC, Sulijaya B, Sumaringsih PR, Dewi RS. Simultaneous implant and guided bone regeneration using bovine-derived xenograft and acellular dermal matrix in aesthetic zone. Dent J (Basel). 2024;12(3):52.
Skoglund A, Hising P, Young C. A clinical and histologic examination in humans of the osseous response to implanted natural bone mineral. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1997;12(2):194-9.
Piattelli M, Favero GA, Scarano A, Orsini G, Piattelli A. Bone reactions to anorganic bovine bone (Bio-Oss) used in sinus augmentation procedures: a histologic long-term report of 20 cases in humans. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1999;14(6):835-40.
Zhao H, Hu J, Zhao L. Histological analysis of socket preservation using DBBM: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020:121(6):729-35.
de Azambuja Carvalho PH, de Oliveira Ciaramicolo N, Ferreira O Jr, Pereira-Filho VA. Clinical and laboratorial outcomes of xenogeneic biomaterials: literature review. Front Oral Maxillofac Med. 2023;5:21-43.
Jung RE, Benic GI, Scherrer D, Hammerle CHF. Cone beam computed tomography evaluation of regenerated buccal bone 5 years after simultaneous implant placement and guided bone regeneration procedures: a randomized, controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26(1):28-34.
Jung RE, Herzog M, Wolleb K, Ramel CF, Thoma DS, Hämmerle CH. A randomized controlled clinical trial comparing small buccal dehiscence defects around dental implants treated with guided bone regeneration or left for spontaneous healing. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017;28(3):348-54.
Chiapasco M, Zaniboni M. Clinical outcomes of GBR procedures to correct peri-implant dehiscences and fenestrations: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;20 (Suppl 4):113-23.
Temmerman A, Cortellini S, Van Dessel J, De Greef A, Jacobs R, Dhondt R, Teughels W, Quirynen M. Bovine-derived xenograft in combination with autogenous bone chips versus xenograft alone for the augmentation of bony dehiscences around oral implants: A randomized, controlled, split-mouth clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol. 2020;47(1):110-9.
Lutz R, Berger-Fink S, Stockmann P, Neukam FW, Schlegel KA. Sinus floor augmentation with autogenous bone vs. a bovine-derived xenograft: a 5-year retrospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26(6):644–8.
Cannizzaro G, Felice P, Leone M, Viola P, Esposito M. Early loading of implants in the atrophic posterior maxilla: Lateral sinus lift with autogenous bone and bio-oss versus crestal mini sinus lift and 8-mm hydroxyapatite-coated implants. a randomised controlled clinical trial. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2009;2(1):25–38.
Bannister SR, Powell CA. Foreign body reaction to anorganic bovine bone and autogenous bone with platelet-rich plasma in guided bone regeneration. J Periodontol. 2008;79(6):1116–20.
Scolozzi P, Perez A, Verdeja R, Courvoisier DS, Lombardi T. Association between maxillary sinus fungus ball and sinus bone grafting with deproteinized bovine bone substitutes: a case-control study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2016;121(6):e143–7.
Jensen T, Schou S, Stavropoulos A, Terheyden H, Holmstrup P. Maxillary sinus floor augmentation with bio-oss or bio-oss mixed with autogenous bone as graft: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23(3):263–73.
Rodriguez AE, Nowzari H. The long-term risks and complications of bovine-derived xenografts: a case series. J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2019;23(5):487–92.
Misch CE, Perel ML, Wang HL, Sammartino G, Galindo-Moreno P, Trisi P, et al: Implant success, survival, and failure: the International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) Pisa Consensus Conference. Implant Dent. 2008;17(1):5–15.
Huynh-Ba G, Oates TW, Williams MAH. Immediate loading vs. early/ conventional loading of immediately placed implants in partially edentulous patients from the patients’ perspective: a systematic review. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2018;29 (Suppl. 16):255-69.
Artas G, Gul M, Acikan I, Kirtay M, Bozoglan A, Simsek S, Yaman F, Dundar S. A comparison of different bone graft materials in peri-implant guided bone regeneration. Braz Oral Res. 2018;32:e59.
ArRejaie A, Hassan KS, Alharbi F, Alagl AS. Platelet-rich plasma gel combined with bovine-derived xenograft for the treatment of dehiscence around immediately placed conventionally loaded dental implants in humans: cone beam computed tomography and three-dimensional image evaluation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2016;31(2):431-8.
Işık G , Yüce MÖ , Koçak-Topbaş N , Günbay T. Guided bone regeneration simultaneous with implant placement using bovine-derived xenograft with and without liquid platelet-rich fibrin: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig. 2021;25(9):5563-75.
Juodzbalys G, Raustia AM, Kubilius R. A 5-year follow-up study on one-stage implants inserted concomitantly with localized alveolar ridge augmentation. J Oral Rehabil. 2007;34(10):781-9.
El Ebiary SO, Atef M, Abdelaziz MS, Kashaba M. Guided immediate implant with and without using a mixture of autogenous and xeno bone grafts in the dental esthetic zone: a randomized clinical trial. BMC Res Notes. 2023;16(1):331.
Le BT, Borzabadi-Farahani A. Simultaneous implant placement and bone grafting with particulate mineralized allograft in sites with buccal wall defects, a three-year follow-up and review of literature. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2014;42(5):552-9.