scholarly journals Volumetric osseous changes in the completely edentulous maxilla after sinus grafting and lateral bone augmentation: a systematic review

2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (11) ◽  
pp. 1470-1480 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Coopman ◽  
J. Fennis ◽  
H. Ghaeminia ◽  
G. Van de Vyvere ◽  
C. Politis ◽  
...  
2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johan Anton Jochum Keestra ◽  
Obada Barry ◽  
Lianne de Jong ◽  
Gerhard Wahl

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. 18-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ignacio Sanz-Sánchez ◽  
Ana Carrillo de Albornoz ◽  
Elena Figuero ◽  
Frank Schwarz ◽  
Ronald Jung ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 334-343 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. J. de Groot ◽  
M. A. E. M. Oomens ◽  
T. Forouzanfar ◽  
E. A. J. M. Schulten

2018 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 74-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suraj Chavda ◽  
Liran Levin

Alveolar ridge augmentation can be completed with various types of bone augmentation materials (autogenous, allograft, xenograft, and alloplast). Currently, autogenous bone is labeled as the “gold standard” because of faster healing times and integration between native and foreign bone. No systematic review has currently determined whether there is a difference in implant success between various bone augmentation materials. The purpose of this article was to systematically review comparative human studies of vertical and horizontal alveolar ridge augmentation comparing different types of bone graft materials (autogenous, allograft, xenograft, and alloplast). A MEDLINE search was conducted under the 3 search concepts of bone augmentation, dental implants, and alveolar ridge augmentation. Studies pertaining to socket grafts or sinus lifts were excluded. Case reports, small case series, and review papers were excluded. A bias assessment tool was applied to the final articles. Overall, 219 articles resulted from the initial search, and 9 articles were included for final analysis. There were no discernible differences in implant success between bone augmentation materials. Generally, patients preferred nonautogenous bone sources as there were fewer hospital days, less pain, and better recovery time. Two articles had industrial support; however, conclusions of whether that support influenced the outcomes could not be determined. Future comparative studies should compare nonautogenous bone sources and have longer follow-up times.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document