scholarly journals Horizontal Bone Augmentation and Simultaneous Implant Placement using Xenogeneic Bone Rings Technique: A Retrospective Clinical Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yude Ding ◽  
LianFei Wang ◽  
Kuiwei Su ◽  
Jinxing Gao ◽  
Xiao Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Bone Grafts ◽  
Bone Defects ◽  
Bone Augmentation ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Retrospective Clinical Study ◽  
One Year ◽  
The One

Abstract Objectives: This study evaluated the use of bone ring technique with xenogeneic bone grafts in treating horizontal alveolar bone defects. Material and methods: In total, 11 patients in need of horizontal bone augmentation treatment before implant placement were included in this retrospective study. All patients received simultaneous bone augmentation surgery and implant placement with xenogeneic bone ring grafts. We evaluated the postoperative efficacy of the bone ring technique with xenogeneic bone grafts using radiographical and clinical parameters. Results: Survival rates of implants were 100%. Cone-beam computed tomography revealed that the xenogeneic bone ring graft had significantly sufficient horizontal bone augmentation below the implant neck platform to 0 mm, 1mm, 2mm, and 3mm. It could also provide an excellent peri-implant tissue condition during the one-year follow-up after loading. Conclusion: The bone ring technique with xenogeneic bone ring graft could increase and maintain horizontal bone mass in the region of the implant neck platforms in serious horizontal bone defects.

scholarly journals Horizontal bone augmentation and simultaneous implant placement using xenogeneic bone rings technique: a retrospective clinical study

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yude Ding ◽  
Lianfei Wang ◽  
Kuiwei Su ◽  
Jinxing Gao ◽  
Xiao Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Bone Grafts ◽  
Bone Defects ◽  
Cone Beam ◽  
Clinical Parameters ◽  
Bone Augmentation ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Retrospective Clinical Study

AbstractThis study evaluated the use of bone ring technique with xenogeneic bone grafts in treating horizontal alveolar bone defects. In total, 11 patients in need of horizontal bone augmentation treatment before implant placement were included in this retrospective study. All patients received simultaneous bone augmentation surgery and implant placement with xenogeneic bone ring grafts. We evaluated the postoperative efficacy of the bone ring technique with xenogeneic bone grafts using radiographical and clinical parameters. Survival rates of implants were 100%. Cone-beam computed tomography revealed that the xenogeneic bone ring graft had significantly sufficient horizontal bone augmentation below the implant neck platform to 0 mm, 1 mm, 2 mm, and 3 mm. It could also provide an excellent peri-implant tissue condition during the 1-year follow-up after loading. The bone ring technique with xenogeneic bone ring graft could increase and maintain horizontal bone mass in the region of the implant neck platforms in serious horizontal bone defects.

scholarly journals Simultaneous implant placement with autogenous onlay bone grafts: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Guoqiang Ma ◽  
Chaoan Wu ◽  
Miaoting Shao
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Bone Grafts ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Analysis Model ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Delayed Implant Placement ◽  
Onlay Grafts

AbstractSeveral authors have suggested that implants can be placed simultaneously with onlay bone grafts without affecting outcomes. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to answer the following clinical questions: (1) What are the outcomes of implants placed simultaneously with autogenous onlay bone grafts? And (2) is there a difference in outcomes between simultaneous vs delayed placement of implants with autogenous onlay bone grafts? Databases of PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched up to 15 November 2020. Data on implant survival was extracted from all the included studies (single arm and comparative) to calculate point estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and pooled using the DerSimonian–Laird meta-analysis model. We also compared implant survival rates between the simultaneous and delayed placement of implants with data from comparative studies. Nineteen studies were included. Five of them compared simultaneous and delayed placement of implants. Dividing the studies based on follow-up duration, the pooled survival of implant placed simultaneously with onlay grafts after <2.5 years of follow-up was 93.1% (95% CI 82.6 to 97.4%) and after 2.5–5 years was 86% (95% CI 78.6 to 91.1%). Implant survival was found to be 85.8% (95% CI 79.6 to 90.3%) with iliac crest grafts and 95.7% (95% CI 83.9 to 93.0%) with intra-oral grafts. Our results indicated no statistically significant difference in implant survival between simultaneous and delayed placement (OR 0.43, 95% 0.07, 2.49, I2=59.04%). Data on implant success and bone loss were limited. Data indicates that implants placed simultaneously with autogenous onlay grafts have a survival rate of 93.1% and 86% after a follow-up of <2.5 years and 2.5–5years respectively. A limited number of studies indicate no significant difference in implant survival between the simultaneous and delayed placement of implants with onlay bone grafts. There is a need for randomized controlled trials comparing simultaneous and delayed implant placement to provide robust evidence.

scholarly journals Immediate Implant Placement by Interradicular Bone Drilling before Molar Extraction: Clinical Case Report with One-Year Follow-Up

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuardo Valenzuela ◽  
José M. Olivares ◽  
Nicolás Weiss ◽  
Dafna Benadof
Keyword(s):  
Survival Rates ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Primary Stability ◽  
Bone Drilling ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Immediate Implants ◽  
Immediate Implant ◽  
One Year ◽  
Molar Extraction

The placement of immediate implants in the posterior sector is a widespread procedure where the success and survival rates are similar to those of traditional protocols. It has several anatomical challenges, such as the presence of interradicular bone septa that hinder a correct three-dimensional positioning of the implant and may compromise primary stability and/or cause damage of neighboring structures. The aim of this article is to present the treatment and the one-year clinical follow-up of a patient who received immediate implant placement using an interradicular bone-drilling technique before the molar extraction.

scholarly journals An Easy and Effective Technique for Silicone Facial Implant Insertion and Fixation to Periosteum

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (18) ◽  
pp. 6508
Author(s):  
Raffaele Rauso ◽  
Giorgio Lo Giudice ◽  
Carmelo Lo Faro ◽  
Giovanni Francesco Nicoletti ◽  
Romolo Fragola ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Technique ◽  
Complete Understanding ◽  
Effective Technique ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Intraoral Approach ◽  
One Year ◽  
The One ◽  
Implant Dislocation ◽  
Implant Displacement

In this paper, we present a simple way to place the implant into a harvested pocket and to subsequently fix it percutaneously. Eighteen patients (1 male, 13 females, 4 transgender), underwent facial implant placement; a total of 31 implants were placed (1 pair of angles of the mandible implants, 12 pairs of malar/sub-malar implants, and 5 chin implants). The intraoral approach was performed on 15 patients, and on the remaining three patients, the sub-ciliary lower lid approach was preferred. Patients were followed up for at least one year with a maximum follow-up of seven years (mean 1.8 years). In all the cases, except one, patients healed without complications. One case of implant displacement and infection was recorded. No other complication was documented. The technique described is similar to the one suggested by Peled, although some useful tips were added, namely the use of sutures, not only to fix the implant but also to drive it into the harvested pocket. In addition, larger absorbable “left in place” sutures were used, avoiding accidental implant dislocation during their removal. Further studies are required to gain a more complete understanding of the effectiveness and reproducibility of this surgical technique.

scholarly journals Guided bone regeneration in staged vertical and horizontal bone augmentation using platelet-rich fibrin associated with bone grafts: a retrospective clinical study

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Alberto Amaral Valladão ◽  
Mabelle Freitas Monteiro ◽  
Julio Cesar Joly
Keyword(s):  
Bone Regeneration ◽  
Bone Grafts ◽  
Bone Defects ◽  
Guided Bone Regeneration ◽  
Collagen Membrane ◽  
Bone Augmentation ◽  
Platelet Rich Fibrin ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Retrospective Clinical Study ◽  
Bone Gain

Abstract Background The use of guided bone regeneration (GBR) for vertical and horizontal bone gain is a predictable approach to correct the bone defects before implant installation; however, the use of different protocols is associated with different clinical results. It is suggested that platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) could improve the outcomes of regenerative procedures. Thus, this study aimed to describe the bone gain associated with GBR procedures combining membranes, bone grafts, and PRF for vertical and horizontal bone augmentation. Materials and methods Eighteen patients who needed vertical or horizontal bone regeneration before installing dental implants were included in the study. The horizontal bone defects were treated with a GBR protocol that includes the use of a mixture of particulate autogenous and xenogenous grafts in the proportion of 1:1, injectable form of PRF (i-PRF) to agglutinate the graft, an absorbable collagen membrane covering the regenerated region, and leukocyte PRF (L-PRF) membrane covering the GBR membrane. The vertical bone defects were treated with the same grafted mixture protected by a titanium-reinforced non-resorbable high-density polytetrafluoroethylene (d-PTFE-Ti) membrane and covered by L-PRF. The bone gain was measured using a cone-beam computed tomography at baseline and after a period of 7.5 (± 1.0) months. Results All patients underwent surgery to install implants after this regenerative protocol. The GBR produces an increase in bone thickness (p < 0.001) and height (p < 0.005) after treatment, with a bone gain of 5.9 ± 2.4 for horizontal defects and 5.6 ± 2.6 for vertical defects. In horizontal defects, the gain was higher in the maxilla than in mandible (p = 0.014) and in anterior than the posterior region (p = 0.033). No differences related to GBR location were observed in vertical defects (p > 0.05). Conclusion GBR associated with a mixture of particulate autogenous and xenogenous grafts and i-PRF is effective for vertical and horizontal bone augmentation in maxillary and mandibular regions, permitting sufficient bone gain to future implant placement. Trial registration REBEC, RBR-3CSG3J. Date of registration—19 July 2019, retrospectively registered. http://www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/rg/RBR-3csg3j/

scholarly journals Protocol for Bone Augmentation with Simultaneous Early Implant Placement: A Retrospective Multicenter Clinical Study

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Fairbairn ◽  
Minas Leventis
Keyword(s):  
Bone Regeneration ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Functional Results ◽  
Treatment Modalities ◽  
Specific Method ◽  
Bone Augmentation ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Alloplastic Materials ◽  
One Year ◽  
Atraumatic Extraction

Purpose.To present a novel protocol for alveolar bone regeneration in parallel to early implant placement.Methods.497 patients in need of extraction and early implant placement with simultaneous bone augmentation were treated in a period of 10 years. In all patients the same specific method was followed and grafting was performed utilizingin situhardening fully resorbable alloplastic grafting materials consisting ofβ-tricalcium phosphate and calcium sulfate. The protocol involved atraumatic extraction, implant placement after 4 weeks with simultaneous bone augmentation, and loading of the implant 12 weeks after placement and grafting. Follow-up periods ranged from 6 months to 10 years (mean of 4 years).Results.A total of 601 postextraction sites were rehabilitated in 497 patients utilizing the novel protocol. Three implants failed before loading and three implants failed one year after loading, leaving an overall survival rate of99.0%.Conclusions.This standardized protocol allows successful long-term functional results regarding alveolar bone regeneration and implant rehabilitation. The concept of placing the implant 4 weeks after extraction, augmenting the bone around the implant utilizing fully resorbable, biomechanically stable, alloplastic materials, and loading the implant at 12 weeks seems to offer advantages when compared with traditional treatment modalities.

scholarly journals The first experience of gene therapy for the complex treatment of no-option chronic limb-threatening ischemia

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 83
Author(s):  
Yu. V. Chervyakov ◽  
H. N. Ha
Keyword(s):  
Gene Therapy ◽  
Ulcer Healing ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Total Mortality ◽  
Major Amputation ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
One Year ◽  
The One

<p><strong>Aim.</strong> To evaluate the effects of complex treatments with no-option chronic limb-threatening ischemia patients with ulcers, using plasmid-based vascular endothelial growth factor-165 (VEGF-165) gene therapy in a one year follow-up period.</p><p><strong>Methods.</strong> In total, 43 patients with no-option chronic limb-threatening ischemia were enrolled in a one year follow-up study. All patients received standard conservative treatment in combination with gene therapy. The mean patient age was 68.0 ± 9.8 years; 65 % men and 35 % women. Patients were divided into four subgroups according to WIfI (Wound, Ischemia, and foot Infection) combinations: 130 — 37 % (n = 16); 131 — 21 % (n = 9); 230 — 21 % (n = 9), and 231 — 21 % (n = 9). Effectiveness criteria were set at major amputation rates, amputation-free survival rates, total mortality, and rates of ulcer healing in the one year follow-up period.</p><p><strong>Results.</strong> Major amputation rates, amputation-free survival rates, total mortality, and rates of ulcer healing during the one year follow-up were; 28, 63, 12 and 51 %, respectively. Separately, a subgroup of WIfI 130 combination patients experienced significant improvements (p = 0.01): amputation-free survival — 94 %, limb salvage rates — 100 %, and rate of ulcer healing — 88 %.</p><p><strong>Conclusion.</strong> Using a plasmid-based VEGF-165 gene therapy approach in the subgroup with the WIfI 130 combination was beneficial. Gene therapy was not effective in patients with large ulcer areas and depth, and local infections (subgroups; 230 and 231). The higher WIfI combinations led to an increase in major amputation rates, reduced amputation-free survival and ulcer healing rates. Total mortality was independently not associated with ulcer area and depth, and severity of local infection. Total mortality between subgroups 130, 131, 230, 231 for WIfI combinations during 1 year of follow-up was not statistically differences (log-rank test, p = 0.67)</p><p>Received 2 June 2020. Revised 16 October 2020. Accepted 28 October 2020.</p><p><strong>Conflict of interest:</strong> Authors declare no conflicts of interest.</p><p><strong>Funding:</strong> The study did not have sponsorship.</p>

scholarly journals Efficacy of Collagen-Based Membranes in Alveolar Bone Augmentation

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (11) ◽  
pp. 2048 ◽  
Author(s):  
Na-Rae Choi ◽  
George Sándor ◽  
Yong-Deok Kim
Keyword(s):  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Cross Linking ◽  
Bone Augmentation ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Bone Maintenance ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Subject ◽  
One Year

Collagen-based membranes (CBMs) have similar permissive bone formation capabilities when compared to non-absorbable membranes. CBMs have been classified as non-cross-linked membranes (NCLMs) and cross-linked membranes (CLMs) depending on whether the cross-linking between the collagen fibers was artificially increased. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the bone maintenance capacity between NCLMs and CLMs by comparing resorption of regenerated bone. The inclusion criteria consisted of: (1) The use of a CBM, either being an NCLM or CLM for coverage of grafted bone; (2) follow-up for more than one year; (3) the presence of the patient's orthopantomographic X-ray (OPTG) immediately following the installation of implants and one year after. The bone resorption observed in the OPTG was determined by measuring the number of exposed threads of the implant. The number of thread exposures in the implant was compared according to CBM types. OPTGs taken immediately following the installation of implants and at one year after installation were compared. The subject of the measurement was always the implant in which the greatest number of exposed threads were present in each patient. A total of 56 subjects and 97 implants were used in this study. There was no significant difference between NCLM and CLM groups (p > 0.05). However, there was a statistically significant difference (p = 0.02) between the groups when a bone graft was applied to both the maxilla and the mandible. The average number of thread exposures was less than 1.5. In this study, no comparison was made between commonly known causes of bone loss and membrane types.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Feasibility of Salvage Re-Irradiation with CyberKnife for In-Field Neck Lymph Node Recurrence: A Retrospective Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (11) ◽  
pp. 1911
Author(s):  
Kobayashi ◽  
Sato ◽  
Saitoh ◽  
Oike ◽  
Nakajima ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lymph Node ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Target Volume ◽  
Neck Lymph Node ◽  
Fatal Bleeding ◽  
Primary Radiotherapy ◽  
One Year ◽  
The One ◽  
Radiotherapy Dose

Neck lymph node (LN) recurrence in the irradiated field represents an important aspect of treatment failure after primary radiotherapy owing to the lack of a standard treatment. The aim of this study is to investigate the efficacy and safety of CyberKnife treatment for neck LN recurrence after radiotherapy. Between 2008 and 2016, 55 neck LN recurrences after radiotherapy in 16 patients were treated with CyberKnife. The median follow-up period was 17 months (range, 2–53 months). The median previous radiotherapy dose was 68 Gy (range, 50–70 Gy). The median marginal dose as equivalent dose delivered in 2-Gy fractions (α/β = 10) was 50 Gy (range, 40–58 Gy). The one-year local control (LC) and overall survival rates were 81% and 71%, respectively. The one-year LC was higher with a target volume ≤1.0 cm3 than that with a target volume >1.0 cm3 (p = 0.006). Fatal bleeding was observed in one patient who had large (91 cm3) and widespread tumor with invasion to the carotid artery before CyberKnife treatment. CyberKnife treatment for neck LN recurrence is safe and feasible in most cases. Indication for the treatment should be carefully considered for large and widespread tumors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document