Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons

The Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (대한구강악안면외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Horizontal ridge augmentation with porcine bone-derived grafting material: a long-term retrospective clinical study with more than 5 years of follow-up

  • Jin-Won Choi (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Section of Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Soo-Shin Hwang (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Section of Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Pil-Young Yun (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Section of Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Young-Kyun Kim (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Section of Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital)
  • Received : 2023.10.10
  • Accepted : 2023.11.15
  • Published : 2023.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of implants placed in horizontally augmented alveolar ridges using porcine bone grafts and to investigate the long-term stability of the porcine bone grafts. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 49 sites that underwent horizontal ridge augmentation using porcine bone grafts and implant placement with a follow-up period longer than 5 years. Furthermore, additional analysis was conducted on 24 sites where porcine bone grafts were used exclusively for horizontal ridge augmentation and implant placement. Results: The mean follow-up period after prosthesis loading was 67.5 months, with a mean marginal bone loss of 0.23 mm at 1 year and a cumulative mean marginal bone loss of 0.40 mm over the entire follow-up period. Of the 49 implants, 2 were lost and 3 did not meet the success criteria, resulting in a survival rate of 95.9% and a success rate of 89.8%. In 24 sites, the mean marginal bone loss was 0.23 mm at 1 year and 0.41 mm at 65.8 months, with 100% survival and success rates. Conclusion: Porcine bone grafts can be successfully used in horizontal ridge augmentation for implant placement in cases of ridges with insufficient horizontal width.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Assistance provided by Na-Hee Chang in the Biomedical Research Institute of Seoul National University Bundang Hospital was greatly appreciated.

References

  1. Esposito M, Worthington HV, Coulthard P, Thomsen P. Maintaining and re-establishing health around osseointegrated oral implants: a Cochrane systematic review comparing the efficacy of various treatments. Periodontol 2000 2003;33:204-12. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0906-6713.2003.03317.x
  2. Candrlic M, Tomas M, Karl M, Malesic L, Vcev A, Peric Kacarevic Z, et al. Comparison of injectable biphasic calcium phosphate and a bovine xenograft in socket preservation: qualitative and quantitative histologic study in humans. Int J Mol Sci 2022;23:2539. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23052539
  3. Koo TH, Song YW, Cha JK, Jung UW, Kim CS, Lee JS. Histologic analysis following grafting of damaged extraction sockets using deproteinized bovine or porcine bone mineral: a randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 2020;31:93-102. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13557
  4. Addis A, Canciani E, Campagnol M, Colombo M, Frigerio C, Recupero D, et al. A new anorganic equine bone substitute for oral surgery: structural characterization and regenerative potential. Materials (Basel) 2022;15:1031. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15031031
  5. 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;34:781-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2006.01679.x
  6. Beretta M, Cicciu M, Poli PP, Rancitelli D, Bassi G, Grossi GB, et al. A retrospective evaluation of 192 implants placed in augmented bone: long-term follow-up study. J Oral Implantol 2015;41:669-74. https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-d-14-00123
  7. Schmitt CM, Moest T, Lutz R, Neukam FW, Schlegel KA. Anorganic bovine bone (ABB) vs. autologous bone (AB) plus ABB in maxillary sinus grafting. A prospective non-randomized clinical and histomorphometrical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015;26:1043-50. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12396
  8. Lutz R, Berger-Fink S, Stockmann P, Neukam FW, Schlegel KA. Sinus floor augmentation with autogenous bone vs. a bovinederived xenograft: a 5-year retrospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015;26:644-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12352
  9. Holzer A, Pietschmann MF, Rosl C, Hentschel M, Betz O, Matsuura M, et al. The interrelation of trabecular microstructural parameters of the greater tubercle measured for different species. J Orthop Res 2012;30:429-34. https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.21525
  10. Lee JH, Yi GS, Lee JW, Kim DJ. Physicochemical characterization of porcine bone-derived grafting material and comparison with bovine xenografts for dental applications. J Periodontal Implant Sci 2017;47:388-401. https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2017.47.6.388
  11. Lee JS, Cha JK, Kim CS. Alveolar ridge regeneration of damaged extraction sockets using deproteinized porcine versus bovine bone minerals: a randomized clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2018;20:729-37. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12628
  12. Lee JS, Shin HK, Yun JH, Cho KS. Randomized clinical trial of maxillary sinus grafting using deproteinized porcine and bovine bone mineral. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2017;19:140-50. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12430
  13. Agop-Forna D, Torok R, Torok B, Dragomir R, Ehrenfest DMD, Dascalu C, et al. Postoperative study of bone gain in mandibular alveolar bone reconstructed with screw-guided bone regeneration technique and porcine-derived xenograft in 42 edentulous patient candidates for implant-prosthetic therapy. Appl Sci 2021;11:9826. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11219826
  14. Scarano A, Piattelli A, Assenza B, Quaranta A, Perrotti V, Piattelli M, et al. Porcine bone used in sinus augmentation procedures: a 5-year retrospective clinical evaluation. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010;68:1869-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2009.09.015
  15. Roberto C, Paolo T, Giovanni C, Ugo C, Bruno B, GiovanniBattista MF. Bone remodeling around implants placed after socket preservation: a 10-year retrospective radiological study. Int J Implant Dent 2021;7:74. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-021-00354-7
  16. Marconcini S, Giammarinaro E, Derchi G, Alfonsi F, Covani U, Barone A. Clinical outcomes of implants placed in ridge-preserved versus nonpreserved sites: a 4-year randomized clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2018;20:906-14. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12682
  17. Barone A, Orlando B, Cingano L, Marconcini S, Derchi G, Covani U. A randomized clinical trial to evaluate and compare implants placed in augmented versus non-augmented extraction sockets: 3-year results. J Periodontol 2012;83:836-46. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2011.110205
  18. Albrektsson T, Zarb G, Worthington P, Eriksson AR. The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1986;1:11-25.
  19. Tolstunov L, Hicke B. Horizontal augmentation through the ridgesplit procedure: a predictable surgical modality in implant reconstruction. J Oral Implantol 2013;39:59-68. https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-d-12-00112
  20. Mordenfeld A, Aludden H, Starch-Jensen T. Lateral ridge augmentation with two different ratios of deproteinized bovine bone and autogenous bone: a 2-year follow-up of a randomized and controlled trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2017;19:884-94. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12512
  21. Hellem S, Astrand P, Stenstrom B, Engquist B, Bengtsson M, Dahlgren S. Implant treatment in combination with lateral augmentation of the alveolar process: a 3-year prospective study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2003;5:233-40. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2003.tb00206.x
  22. Meloni SM, Jovanovic SA, Urban I, Baldoni E, Pisano M, Tallarico M. Horizontal ridge augmentation using GBR with a native collagen membrane and 1:1 ratio of particulate xenograft and autologous bone: a 3-year after final loading prospective clinical study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2019;21:669-77. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12808
  23. 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;42:552-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2013.07.026
  24. Gielkens PF, Bos RR, Raghoebar GM, Stegenga B. Is there evidence that barrier membranes prevent bone resorption in autologous bone grafts during the healing period? A systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007;22:390-8.
  25. Karoussis IK, Bragger U, Salvi GE, Burgin W, Lang NP. Effect of implant design on survival and success rates of titanium oral implants: a 10-year prospective cohort study of the ITI Dental Implant System. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004;15:8-17. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.00983.x