View Item 

Show simple item record

Longâ term Evaluation of Periâ implant Bone Level after Reconstruction of Severely Atrophic Edentulous Maxilla via Vertical and Horizontal Guided Bone Regeneration in Combination with Sinus Augmentation: A Case Series with 1 to 15 Years of Loading
dc.contributor.authorUrban, Istvan A.
dc.contributor.authorMonje, Alberto
dc.contributor.authorLozada, Jaime L.
dc.contributor.authorWang, Hom‐lay
dc.date.accessioned2017-04-13T20:34:11Z
dc.date.available2018-05-04T20:56:58Zen
dc.date.issued2017-02
dc.identifier.citationUrban, Istvan A.; Monje, Alberto; Lozada, Jaime L.; Wang, Hom‐lay (2017). "Longâ term Evaluation of Periâ implant Bone Level after Reconstruction of Severely Atrophic Edentulous Maxilla via Vertical and Horizontal Guided Bone Regeneration in Combination with Sinus Augmentation: A Case Series with 1 to 15 Years of Loading." Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research 19(1): 46-55.
dc.identifier.issn1523-0899
dc.identifier.issn1708-8208
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/136250
dc.description.abstractBackgroundTo the best of the authors’ knowledge, there is very limited clinical data on the outcomes of simultaneous guided bone regeneration (GBR) for horizontal and/or vertical bone gain for the reconstruction of severely atrophic edentulous maxilla. Therefore, the purpose of the clinical series presented herein was to clinically evaluate longâ term horizontal and vertical bone gain, as well as implant survival rate after reconstruction of severely atrophic edentulous maxillary ridges.Material and MethodsSixteen patients (mean age: 64.6â ±â 14.6 years of age) were consecutively treated for vertical and/or horizontal bone augmentation via GBR in combination with bilateral sinus augmentation utilizing a mixture of autologous and anorganic bovine bone. Implant survival, bone gain, intraoperative/postoperative complications and periâ implant bone loss were calculated up to the last followâ up exam.ResultsOverall, 122 dental implants were placed into augmented sites and have been followed from 12 to 180 months (mean: 76.5 months). Implant survival was 100% (satisfactory survival rate of 97.5%). Mean bone gain was 5.6â mm (max: 9â mm; min: 3â mm) While vertical bone gain was 5.1â ±â 1.8â mm; horizontal bone gain was 7.0â ±â 1.5â mm. No intraoperative/postoperative complications were noted. Mean periâ implant bone loss values were consistent within the standards for implant success (1.4â ±â 1.0â mm). At patientâ level, only one patient who had three implants presented with severe periâ implant bone loss.ConclusionComplete reconstruction of an atrophied maxilla can be successfully achieved by means of guided bone regeneration for horizontal and/or vertical bone gain including bilateral sinus augmentation using a mixture of anorganic bovine bone and autologous bone.
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.
dc.subject.othermaxillary reconstruction
dc.subject.othervertical ridge augmentation
dc.subject.otheredentulous maxilla
dc.subject.othersinus augmentation
dc.subject.otherhorizontal ridge augmentation
dc.subject.otherguided bone regeneration
dc.titleLongâ term Evaluation of Periâ implant Bone Level after Reconstruction of Severely Atrophic Edentulous Maxilla via Vertical and Horizontal Guided Bone Regeneration in Combination with Sinus Augmentation: A Case Series with 1 to 15 Years of Loading
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollow
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelDentistry
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciences
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Reviewed
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/136250/1/cid12431_am.pdf
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/136250/2/cid12431.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/cid.12431
dc.identifier.sourceClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGalindoâ Moreno P, Hernandezâ Cortes P, Aneirosâ Fernandez J, Camara M, Mesa F, Wallace S, O’Valle F. Morphological evidences of Bioâ Oss(R) colonization by CD44â positive cells. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014; 25: 366 â 371.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGalindoâ Moreno P, Fernandezâ Jimenez A, Avilaâ Ortiz G, Silvestre FJ, Hernandezâ Cortes P, Wang HL. Marginal bone loss around implants placed in maxillary native bone or grafted sinuses: a retrospective cohort study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014; 25: 378 â 384.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGalindoâ Moreno P, Fernandezâ Jimenez A, O’Valle F, Silvestre FJ, Sanchezâ Fernandez E, Monje A, Catena A. Marginal bone loss in implants placed in grafted maxillary sinus. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2015; 17: 373 â 383.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSimion M, Jovanovic SA, Tinti C, Benfenati SP. Longâ term evaluation of osseointegrated implants inserted at the time or after vertical ridge augmentation. A retrospective study on 123 implants with 1â 5 year followâ up. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001; 12: 35 â 45.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAbassi YA, Xi B, Zhang W, Ye P, Kirstein SL, Gaylord MR, Feinstein SC, Wang X, Xu X. Kinetic cellâ based morphological screening: prediction of mechanism of compound action and offâ target effects. Chem Biol 2009; 16: 712 â 723.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGalindoâ Moreno P, Morenoâ Riestra I, Avila G, Padialâ Molina M, Paya JA, Wang HL, O’Valle F. Effect of anorganic bovine bone to autogenous cortical bone ratio upon bone remodeling patterns following maxillary sinus augmentation. Clin Oral Implants Res 2011; 22: 857 â 864.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDel Fabbro M, Bellini CM, Romeo D, Francetti L. Tilted implants for the rehabilitation of edentulous jaws: a systematic review. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2012; 14: 612 â 621.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMalo P, Nobre Mde A, Lopes I. A new approach to rehabilitate the severely atrophic maxilla using extramaxillary anchored implants in immediate function: a pilot study. J Prosthet Dent 2008; 100: 354 â 366.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSharma A, Rahul GR. Zygomatic implants/fixture: a systematic review. J Oral Implantol 2013; 39: 215 â 224.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTestori T, Del Fabbro M, Capelli M, Zuffetti F, Francetti L, Weinstein RL. Immediate occlusal loading and tilted implants for the rehabilitation of the atrophic edentulous maxilla: 1â year interim results of a multicenter prospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008; 19: 227 â 232.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDel Fabbro M, Bortolin M, Taschieri S, Weinstein RL. Effect of autologous growth factors in maxillary sinus augmentation: a systematic review. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2013; 15: 205 â 216.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDuyck J, Van Oosterwyck H, Vander Sloten J, De Cooman M, Puers R, Naert I. Magnitude and distribution of occlusal forces on oral implants supporting fixed prostheses: an in vivo study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000; 11: 465 â 475.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChan HL, Monje A, Suarez F, Benavides E, Wang HL. Palatonasal recess on medial wall of maxillary sinus and clinical implications for sinus augmentation via lateral window approach. J Periodontol 2013; 84: 1087 â 1093.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePjetursson BE, Tan WC, Zwahlen M, Lang NP. A systematic review of the success of sinus floor elevation and survival of implants inserted in combination with sinus floor elevation. J Clin Periodontol 2008; 35: 216 â 240.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRickert D, Vissink A, Slater JJ, Meijer HJ, Raghoebar GM. Comparison between conventional and piezoelectric surgical tools for maxillary sinus floor elevation. A randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2013; 15: 297 â 302.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWallace SS, Mazor Z, Froum SJ, Cho SC, Tarnow DP. Schneiderian membrane perforation rate during sinus elevation using piezosurgery: clinical results of 100 consecutive cases. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2007; 27: 413 â 419.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceUrban IA, Nagursky H, Church C, Lozada JL. Incidence, diagnosis, and treatment of sinus graft infection after sinus floor elevation: a clinical study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2012; 27: 449 â 457.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSimion M, Trisi P, Piattelli A. Vertical ridge augmentation using a membrane technique associated with osseointegrated implants. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1994; 14: 496 â 511.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChiapasco M, Zaniboni M, Boisco M. Augmentation procedures for the rehabilitation of deficient edentulous ridges with oral implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006; 17 ( Suppl 2 ): 136 â 159.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMachtei EE. The effect of membrane exposure on the outcome of regenerative procedures in humans: a metaâ analysis. J Periodontol 2001; 72: 512 â 516.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRocchietta I, Fontana F, Simion M. Clinical outcomes of vertical bone augmentation to enable dental implant placement: a systematic review. J Clin Periodontol 2008; 35: 203 â 215.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMilinkovic I, Cordaro L. Are there specific indications for the different alveolar bone augmentation procedures for implant placement?. A systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2014; 43: 606 â 625.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGaraicoa C, Suarez F, Fu JH, Chan HL, Monje A, Galindoâ Moreno P, Wang HL. Using cone beam computed tomography angle for predicting the outcome of horizontal bone augmentation. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2015; 17: 717 â 723.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePietrokovski J, Massler M. Ridge remodeling after tooth extraction in rats. J Dent Res 1967; 46: 222 â 231.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePietrokovski J, Massler M. Alveolar ridge resorption following tooth extraction. J Prosthet Dent 1967; 17: 21 â 27.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCawood JI, Howell RA. A classification of the edentulous jaws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1988; 17: 232 â 236.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMonje A, Monje F, Hernandezâ Alfaro F, Gonzalezâ Garcia R, Suarezâ Lopez del Amo F, Galindoâ Moreno P, Montaneroâ Fernandez J, Wang HL. Horizontal bone augmentation using autogenous block grafts and particulate xenograft in the severe atrophic maxillary anterior ridges: a coneâ beam computerized tomography case series. J Oral Implantol 2015; 41 ( Spec No ): 366 â 371.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchwarz F, Ferrari D, Balic E, Buser D, Becker J, Sager M. Lateral ridge augmentation using equineâ and bovineâ derived cancellous bone blocks: a feasibility study in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010; 21: 904 â 912.
dc.identifier.citedreferencevon Arx T, Buser D. Horizontal ridge augmentation using autogenous block grafts and the guided bone regeneration technique with collagen membranes: a clinical study with 42 patients. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006; 17: 359 â 366.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChiapasco M, Abati S, Romeo E, Vogel G. Clinical outcome of autogenous bone blocks or guided bone regeneration with eâ PTFE membranes for the reconstruction of narrow edentulous ridges. Clin Oral Implants Res 1999; 10: 278 â 288.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChiapasco M, Di Martino G, Anello T, Zaniboni M, Romeo E. Fresh frozen versus autogenous iliac bone for the rehabilitation of the extremely atrophic maxilla with onlay grafts and endosseous implants: preliminary results of a prospective comparative study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2015; 17 ( Suppl 1 ): e251 â e266.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMonje A, Pikos MA, Chan HL, Suarez F, Gargalloâ Albiol J, Hernandezâ Alfaro F, Galindoâ Moreno P, Wang HL. On the feasibility of utilizing allogeneic bone blocks for atrophic maxillary augmentation. Biomed Res Int 2014; 2014: 814578.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMonje A, Chan HL, Suarez F, Galindoâ Moreno P, Wang HL. Marginal bone loss around tilted implants in comparison to straight implants: a metaâ analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2012; 27: 1576 â 1583.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMonje A, Chan HL, Fu JH, Suarez F, Galindoâ Moreno P, Wang HL. Are short dental implants (<10â mm) effective?. a metaâ analysis on prospective clinical trials. J Periodontol 2013; 84: 895 â 904.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceThoma DS, Zeltner M, Husler J, Hammerle CH, Jung RE. EAO Supplement Working Group 4 â EAO CC 2015 Short implants versus sinus lifting with longer implants to restore the posterior maxilla: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015; 26(Suppl): 154 â 156.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNkenke E, Stelzle F. Clinical outcomes of sinus floor augmentation for implant placement using autogenous bone or bone substitutes: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009; 20 ( Suppl 4 ): 124 â 133.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWallace SS, Froum SJ. Effect of maxillary sinus augmentation on the survival of endosseous dental implants. A systematic review. Ann Periodontol 2003; 8: 328 â 343.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAghaloo TL, Moy PK. Which hard tissue augmentation techniques are the most successful in furnishing bony support for implant placement? Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007; 22 ( Suppl ): 49 â 70.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceUrban IA, Lozada JL. A prospective study of implants placed in augmented sinuses with minimal and moderate residual crestal bone: results after 1 to 5 years. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010; 25: 1203 â 1212.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMelcher AH. On the repair potential of periodontal tissues. J Periodontol 1976; 47: 256 â 260.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceUrban IA, Nagursky H, Lozada JL. Horizontal ridge augmentation with a resorbable membrane and particulated autogenous bone with or without anorganic bovine boneâ derived mineral: a prospective case series in 22 patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2011; 26: 404 â 414.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceUrban IA, Lozada JL, Jovanovic SA, Nagy K. Horizontal guided bone regeneration in the posterior maxilla using recombinant human plateletâ derived growth factor: a case report. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2013; 33: 421 â 425.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceUrban IA, Nagursky H, Lozada JL, Nagy K. Horizontal ridge augmentation with a collagen membrane and a combination of particulated autogenous bone and anorganic bovine boneâ derived mineral: a prospective case series in 25 patients. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2013; 33: 299 â 307.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCanullo L, Trisi P, Simion M. Vertical ridge augmentation around implants using eâ PTFE titaniumâ reinforced membrane and deproteinized bovine bone mineral (bioâ oss): a case report. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2006; 26: 355 â 361.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSimion M, Fontana F, Rasperini G, Maiorana C. Longâ term evaluation of osseointegrated implants placed in sites augmented with sinus floor elevation associated with vertical ridge augmentation: a retrospective study of 38 consecutive implants with 1â to 7â year followâ up. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2004; 24: 208 â 221.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSimion M, Jovanovic SA, Trisi P, Scarano A, Piattelli A. Vertical ridge augmentation around dental implants using a membrane technique and autogenous bone or allografts in humans. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1998; 18: 8 â 23.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceUrban I, Caplanis N, Lozada JL. Simultaneous vertical guided bone regeneration and guided tissue regeneration in the posterior maxilla using recombinant human plateletâ derived growth factor: a case report. J Oral Implantol 2009; 35: 251 â 256.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceUrban IA, Jovanovic SA, Lozada JL. Vertical ridge augmentation using guided bone regeneration (GBR) in three clinical scenarios prior to implant placement: a retrospective study of 35 patients 12 to 72 months after loading. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009; 24: 502 â 510.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceUrban IA, Lozada JL, Jovanovic SA, Nagursky H, Nagy K. Vertical ridge augmentation with titaniumâ reinforced, denseâ PTFE membranes and a combination of particulated autogenous bone and anorganic bovine boneâ derived mineral: a prospective case series in 19 patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014; 29: 185 â 193.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceUrban IA, Monje A, Wang HL. Vertical ridge augmentation and soft tissue reconstruction of the anterior atrophic maxillae: a case series. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2015; 35: 613 â 623.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWang HL, Boyapati L. â PASSâ principles for predictable bone regeneration. Implant Dent 2006; 15: 8 â 17.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHammerle CH, Jung RE. Bone augmentation by means of barrier membranes. Periodontol 2000 2003; 33: 36 â 53.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHammerle CH, Jung RE, Feloutzis A. A systematic review of the survival of implants in bone sites augmented with barrier membranes (guided bone regeneration) in partially edentulous patients. J Clin Periodontol 2002; 29 ( Suppl 3 ): 226 â 231; discussion 232â 223.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchlegel KA, Fichtner G, Schultzeâ Mosgau S, Wiltfang J. Histologic findings in sinus augmentation with autogenous bone chips versus a bovine bone substitute. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003; 18: 53 â 58.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceScarano A, Degidi M, Iezzi G, Pecora G, Piattelli M, Orsini G, Caputi S, Perrotti V, Mangano C, Piattelli A. Maxillary sinus augmentation with different biomaterials: a comparative histologic and histomorphometric study in man. Implant Dent 2006; 15: 197 â 207.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGalindoâ Moreno P, Avila G, Fernandezâ Barbero JE, Mesa F, O’Valleâ Ravassa F, Wang HL. Clinical and histologic comparison of two different composite grafts for sinus augmentation: a pilot clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008; 19: 755 â 759.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGalindoâ Moreno P, Hernandezâ Cortes P, Mesa F, Carranza N, Juodzbalys G, Aguilar M, O’Valle F. Slow resorption of anorganic bovine bone by osteoclasts in maxillary sinus augmentation. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2013; 15: 858 â 866.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMordenfeld A, Hallman M, Johansson CB, Albrektsson T. Histological and histomorphometrical analyses of biopsies harvested 11 years after maxillary sinus floor augmentation with deproteinized bovine and autogenous bone. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010; 21: 961 â 970.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceZijderveld SA, Schulten EA, Aartman IH, ten Bruggenkate CM. Longâ term changes in graft height after maxillary sinus floor elevation with different grafting materials: radiographic evaluation with a minimum followâ up of 4.5 years. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009; 20: 691 â 700.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKahnberg KE, Ekestubbe A, Grondahl K, Nilsson P, Hirsch JM. Sinus lifting procedure. I. Oneâ stage surgery with bone transplant and implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001; 12: 479 â 487.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEsposito M, Grusovin MG, Coulthard P, Worthington HV. The efficacy of various bone augmentation procedures for dental implants: a Cochrane systematic review of randomized controlled clinical trials. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006; 21: 696 â 710.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMisch CE, Perel ML, Wang HL, Sammartino G, Galindoâ Moreno P, Trisi P, Steigmann M, Rebaudi A, Palti A, Pikos MA, Schwartzâ Arad D, Choukroun J, Gutierrezâ Perez JL, Marenzi G, Valavanis DK. Implant success, survival, and failure: the International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) Pisa Consensus Conference. Implant Dent 2008; 17: 5 â 15.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAlbrektsson T, Donos N, Working G. Implant survival and complications. The Third EAO consensus conference 2012. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012; 23 ( Suppl 6 ): 63 â 65.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMayfield L, Skoglund A, Nobreus N, Attstrom R. Clinical and radiographic evaluation, following delivery of fixed reconstructions, at GBR treated titanium fixtures. Clin Oral Implants Res 1998; 9: 292 â 302.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceZitzmann NU, Scharer P, Marinello CP. Longâ term results of implants treated with guided bone regeneration: a 5â year prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001; 16: 355 â 366.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJung RE, Fenner N, Hammerle CH, Zitzmann NU. Longâ term outcome of implants placed with guided bone regeneration (GBR) using resorbable and nonâ resorbable membranes after 12â 14 years. Clin Oral Implants Res 2013; 24: 1065 â 1073.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDonos N, Mardas N, Chadha V. Clinical outcomes of implants following lateral bone augmentation: systematic assessment of available options (barrier membranes, bone grafts, split osteotomy). J Clin Periodontol 2008; 35: 173 â 202.
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
cid12431_am.pdf
Size:
5.075MB
Format:
PDF
View/Open
Name:
cid12431.pdf
Size:
480.9KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

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.