Show simple item record

A randomized clinical trial evaluating the efficacy of the sandwich bone augmentation technique in increasing buccal bone thickness during implant placement surgery

dc.contributor.authorFu, Jia‐huien_US
dc.contributor.authorOh, Tae‐juen_US
dc.contributor.authorBenavides, Erikaen_US
dc.contributor.authorRudek, Ivanen_US
dc.contributor.authorWang, Hom‐layen_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-05-21T18:03:29Z
dc.date.availableWITHHELD_13_MONTHSen_US
dc.date.available2014-05-21T18:03:29Z
dc.date.issued2014-04en_US
dc.identifier.citationFu, Jia‐hui ; Oh, Tae‐ju ; Benavides, Erika; Rudek, Ivan; Wang, Hom‐lay (2014). "A randomized clinical trial evaluating the efficacy of the sandwich bone augmentation technique in increasing buccal bone thickness during implant placement surgery." Clinical Oral Implants Research 25(4): 458-467.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0905-7161en_US
dc.identifier.issn1600-0501en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/106765
dc.description.abstractObjectives Sandwich bone augmentation ( SBA ) has been proposed to augment the width of edentulous ridges for implant placement. This study aimed to investigate the effect of a membrane on SBA for the regeneration of buccal implant dehiscence defects. Material and methods Twenty‐six healthy patients, each with a single defect, were randomly assigned into two groups. Both groups received an inner and outer layer of mineralized human cancellous and cortical particulate allograft. In the test group, a bovine pericardium membrane covered the bone grafts, while no membrane was placed in the control group. Cone beam computed tomography ( CBCT ) scans were taken before and immediately after implant placement and at 6 months post‐surgery. Results All implants placed were successfully osseointegrated at 6 months. Clinical re‐entry measurements showed significant buccal bone gain in the test group compared with the control group ( P  < 0.05). The test group had 1.12, 2.21 and 2.44 mm more buccal bone thickness at 2, 4 and 6 mm below the bone crest. There were no significant differences in the mid‐buccal vertical bone height, defect height and width reductions and bone fill between the two groups ( P  > 0.05). Cone beam computed tomography analysis demonstrated significant buccal bone gain of 1.22 mm in the test group. Radiographic vertical bone loss at 1‐year post‐surgery showed no significant differences between the groups. Conclusion Sandwich bone augmentation is a predictable technique for regenerating buccal bone on implant dehiscence defects. Addition of a barrier membrane prevented significant horizontal buccal bone resorption as space was maintained more effectively when compared with sites treated without a membrane.en_US
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.subject.otherDental Implantsen_US
dc.subject.otherCone Beam Computed Tomographyen_US
dc.subject.otherBone Regenerationen_US
dc.subject.otherBone Graftsen_US
dc.titleA randomized clinical trial evaluating the efficacy of the sandwich bone augmentation technique in increasing buccal bone thickness during implant placement surgeryen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelDentistryen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/106765/1/clr12171.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/clr.12171en_US
dc.identifier.sourceClinical Oral Implants Researchen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePark, S.H. & Wang, H.L. ( 2006 ) Management of localized buccal dehiscence defect with allografts and acellular dermal matrix. International Journal of Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry 26: 589 – 595.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJensen, S.S. & Terheyden, H. ( 2009 ) Bone augmentation procedures in localized defects in the alveolar ridge: clinical results with different bone grafts and bone‐substitute materials. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants 24 ( Suppl. ): 218 – 236.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJunker, R., Dimakis, A., Thoneick, M. & Jansen, J.A. ( 2009 ) Effects of implant surface coatings and composition on bone integration: a systematic review. Clinical Oral Implants Research 20 ( Suppl. 4 ): 185 – 206.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLee, A., Brown, D. & Wang, H.L. ( 2009 ) Sandwich bone augmentation for predictable horizontal bone augmentation. Implant Dentistry 18: 282 – 290.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLoe, H. ( 1967 ) The gingival index, the plaque index and the retention index systems. Journal of Periodontology 38 ( Suppl. ): 610 – 616.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNevins, M., Mellonig, J.T., Clem, D.S., 3rd, Reiser, G.M. & Buser, D.A. ( 1998 ) Implants in regenerated bone: long‐term survival. International Journal of Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry 18: 34 – 45.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOh, T.J., Meraw, S.J., Lee, E.J., Giannobile, W.V. & Wang, H.L. ( 2003 ) Comparative analysis of collagen membranes for the treatment of implant dehiscence defects. Clinical Oral Implants Research 14: 80 – 90.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOh, T.J., Yoon, J., Misch, C.E. & Wang, H.L. ( 2002 ) The causes of early implant bone loss: myth or science? Journal of Periodontology 73: 322 – 333.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceO'Leary, T.J., Drake, R.B. & Naylor, J.E. ( 1972 ) The plaque control record. Journal of Periodontology 43: 38.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePark, S.H., Lee, K.W., Oh, T.J., Misch, C.E., Shotwell, J. & Wang, H.L. ( 2008 ) Effect of absorbable membranes on sandwich bone augmentation. Clinical Oral Implants Research 19: 32 – 41.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePark, S.H. & Wang, H.L. ( 2007 ) Clinical significance of incision location on guided bone regeneration: human study. Journal of Periodontology 78: 47 – 51.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRazavi, T., Palmer, R.M., Davies, J., Wilson, R. & Palmer, P.J. ( 2010 ) Accuracy of measuring the cortical bone thickness adjacent to dental implants using cone beam computed tomography. Clinical Oral Implants Research 21: 718 – 725.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceShiratori, L.N., Marotti, J., Yamanouchi, J., Chilvarquer, I., Contin, I. & Tortamano‐Neto, P. ( 2012 ) Measurement of buccal bone volume of dental implants by means of cone‐beam computed tomography. Clinical Oral Implants Research 23: 797 – 804.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceShotwell, J.L., Billy, E.J., Wang, H.L. & Oh, T.J. ( 2005 ) Implant surgical guide fabrication for partially edentulous patients. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 93: 294 – 297.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSkoglund, A., Hising, P. & Young, C. ( 1997 ) A clinical and histologic examination in humans of the osseous response to implanted natural bone mineral. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants 12: 194 – 199.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSzmukler‐Moncler, S., Salama, H., Reingewirtz, Y. & Dubruille, J.H. ( 1998 ) Timing of loading and effect of micromotion on bone‐dental implant interface: review of experimental literature. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research 43: 192 – 203.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTyndall, D.A. & Brooks, S.L. ( 2000 ) Selection criteria for dental implant site imaging: a position paper of the american academy of oral and maxillofacial radiology. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology and Endodontics 89: 630 – 637.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWang, H.L., Misch, C. & Neiva, R.F. ( 2004 ) “Sandwich” Bone augmentation technique: rationale and report of pilot cases. International Journal of Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry 24: 232 – 245.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWennerberg, A. & Albrektsson, T. ( 2009 ) Effects of titanium surface topography on bone integration: a systematic review. Clinical Oral Implants Research 20 ( Suppl. 4 ): 172 – 184.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceZambon, R., Mardas, N., Horvath, A., Petrie, A., Dard, M. & Donos, N. ( 2012 ) The effect of loading in regenerated bone in dehiscence defects following a combined approach of bone grafting and gbr. Clinical Oral Implants Research 23: 591 – 601.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceZitzmann, N.U., Naef, R. & Scharer, P. ( 1997 ) Resorbable versus nonresorbable membranes in combination with bio‐oss for guided bone regeneration. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants 12: 844 – 852.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceZitzmann, N.U., Scharer, P., Marinello, C.P., Schupbach, P. & Berglundh, T. ( 2001 ) Alveolar ridge augmentation with bio‐oss: a histologic study in humans. International Journal of Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry 21: 288 – 295.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAdell, R., Lekholm, U., Rockler, B. & Branemark, P.I. ( 1981 ) A 15‐year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. International Journal of Oral Surgery 10: 387 – 416.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAdell, R., Lekholm, U., Rockler, B., Branemark, P.I., Lindhe, J., Eriksson, B. & Sbordone, L. ( 1986 ) Marginal tissue reactions at osseointegrated titanium fixtures (i). A 3‐year longitudinal prospective study. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 15: 39 – 52.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAghaloo, T.L. & Moy, P.K. ( 2007 ) Which hard tissue augmentation techniques are the most successful in furnishing bony support for implant placement? International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants 22 ( Suppl. ): 49 – 70.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBashutski, J.D. & Wang, H.L. ( 2007 ) Common implant esthetic complications. Implant Dentistry 16: 340 – 348.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBenic, G.I., Jung, R.E., Siegenthaler, D.W. & Hammerle, C.H. ( 2009 ) Clinical and radiographic comparison of implants in regenerated or native bone: 5‐year results. Clinical Oral Implants Research 20: 507 – 513.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBurchardt, H. ( 1983 ) The biology of bone graft repair. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 174: 28 – 42.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBuser, D., Dula, K., Belser, U.C., Hirt, H.P. & Berthold, H. ( 1995 ) Localized ridge augmentation using guided bone regeneration. Ii. Surgical procedure in the mandible. International Journal of Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry 15: 10 – 29.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBuser, D., Dula, K., Hirt, H.P. & Schenk, R.K. ( 1996 ) Lateral ridge augmentation using autografts and barrier membranes: a clinical study with 40 partially edentulous patients. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 54: 420 – 432; discussion 432–423.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBuser, D., Martin, W. & Belser, U.C. ( 2004 ) Optimizing esthetics for implant restorations in the anterior maxilla: anatomic and surgical considerations. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants 19 ( Suppl. ): 43 – 61.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBuser, D., Weber, H.P. & Lang, N.P. ( 1990 ) Tissue integration of non‐submerged implants. 1‐year results of a prospective study with 100 iti hollow‐cylinder and hollow‐screw implants. Clinical Oral Implants Research 1: 33 – 40.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCooper, L.F., Masuda, T., Yliheikkila, P.K. & Felton, D.A. ( 1998 ) Generalizations regarding the process and phenomenon of osseointegration. Part ii. In vitro studies. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants 13: 163 – 174.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDavies, J.E. ( 2003 ) Understanding peri‐implant endosseous healing. Journal of Dental Education 67: 932 – 949.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDegidi, M., Perrotti, V., Shibli, J.A., Novaes, A.B., Piattelli, A. & Iezzi, G. ( 2011 ) Equicrestal and subcrestal dental implants: a histologic and histomorphometric evaluation of nine retrieved human implants. Journal of Periodontology 82: 708 – 715.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFienitz, T., Schwarz, F., Ritter, L., Dreiseidler, T., Becker, J. & Rothamel, D. ( 2012 ) Accuracy of cone beam computed tomography in assessing peri‐implant bone defect regeneration: a histologically controlled study in dogs. Clinical Oral Implants Research 23: 882 – 887.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFrost, H.M. ( 1983 ) The regional acceleratory phenomenon: a review. Henry Ford Hospital Medical Journal 31: 3 – 9.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFu, J.H., Hsu, Y.T. & Wang, H.L. ( 2012 ) Identifying occlusal overload and how to deal with it to avoid marginal bone loss around implants. European Journal of Oral Implantology 5 ( Suppl. ): S91 – S103.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFugazzotto, P.A. ( 2005 ) Success and failure rates of osseointegrated implants in function in regenerated bone for 72 to 133 months. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants 20: 77 – 83.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGuerra, I., Morais Branco, F., Vasconcelos, M., Afonso, A., Figueiral, H. & Zita, R. ( 2011 ) Evaluation of implant osseointegration with different regeneration techniques in the treatment of bone defects around implants: an experimental study in a rabbit model. Clinical Oral Implants Research 22: 314 – 322.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHammerle, C.H., Jung, R.E. & Feloutzis, A. ( 2002 ) A systematic review of the survival of implants in bone sites augmented with barrier membranes (guided bone regeneration) in partially edentulous patients. Journal of Clinical Periodontology 29 ( Suppl. 3 ): 226 – 231; discussion 232–223.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJemt, T., Lekholm, U. & Grondahl, K. ( 1990 ) 3‐year followup study of early single implant restorations ad modum branemark. International Journal of Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry 10: 340 – 349.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.