Bone augmentation of the atrophic anterior maxilla for dental implants using rhBMP-2 and titanium mesh: histological and tomographic analysis

Filho, Sebastiäo Alves Ribeiro; Francischone, Carlos Eduardo; Oliveira, J. C. de; Ribeiro, Laerte; Prado, Fernandes; Sotto-Maior, Bruno Salles

doi:10.1016/j.ijom.2015.07.004

Cited by 19 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since first described in 1959 by Hurley et al, GBR technique has been widely applied for local alveolar ridge defects and has achieved predictable results . Bone gain values reported in most studies approximately was 2‐6 mm in vertical dimension and 3‐5 mm in horizontal dimension . Although some exceptional results were reported, for example, Louis et al reported a mean vertical bone gain up to 13.7 mm with 4 mm horizontal bone gain.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The application of a newly designed L‐shaped titanium mesh for GBR with simultaneous implant placement in the esthetic zone: A retrospective case series study

Zhang

Cai

2019

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background To our acknowledgment, there were limited clinical studies about the guided bone regeneration (GBR) for both vertical and horizontal augmentation at the same time using titanium mesh (Ti‐mesh) with simultaneous implant placement in the esthetic zone. Meanwhile, studies that specially evaluate resorption and long‐term stability of the augmented labial bone after loading were also rare. Therefore, this study introduced a newly designed L‐shaped Ti‐mesh used for GBR with simultaneous implant placement and evaluated the bone augmentation effectiveness, resorption, and long‐term stability of peri‐implant bone with this newly designed L‐shaped Ti‐mesh. Materials and Methods Twelve patients (16 implants) who had underwent a GBR procedure using L‐shaped Ti‐mesh with simultaneous implants placement were reviewed in this study. Complications, implant success, and survival rate were recorded and calculated. Furthermore, the bone gain values, labial bone resorption, and remaining labial bone volume were measured by cone beam CT (CBCT) during 13‐41 months follow‐up. Results After GBR using L‐shaped Ti‐mesh, the average bone gain values were 3.61 ± 1.50 mm vertically and 3.10 ± 2.06 mm horizontally. The implant success and surviving rate were 93.75% and 100%, respectively during the longest 41 months follow‐up. The vertical labial bone resorption was −0.81 ± 1.00 mm, horizontal labial bone resorption was −0.13 ± 1.19 mm at the top of the implants. The remaining labial bone thickness was 2.24 ± 1.29 mm at the top of the implants and 2.86 ± 1.08 mm at the 2 mm apically from the implant tops after loading. There was still 1.13 ± 1.18 mm vertical labial bone remaining above the top of implants for approximately 87.5% sites. Conclusions GBR using L‐shaped Ti‐mesh with simultaneous implant placement (one‐step surgery) in the esthetic zone could achieve predictable results for vertical and horizontal bone augmentation at the same time. Meanwhile, L‐shaped Ti‐mesh could preferably reconstruct and reduce the labial bone resorption to achieve long‐term esthetics. This newly designed L‐shaped Ti‐mesh may offer predictable and excellent outcomes for the implant restoration in the esthetic zone.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The application of a newly designed L‐shaped titanium mesh for GBR with simultaneous implant placement in the esthetic zone: A retrospective case series study

Zhang

Cai

2019

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The collagen sponge, which is probably the first and most frequently investigated carrier, appears to lack space maintenance for primary augmentation without the addition of a space‐maintaining device (Barboza et al., ). Consequently, promising results were reported for combinations of a collagen sponge loaded with rhBMP‐2 with a titanium mesh (de Freitas et al., , ; Ribeiro Filho et al., ). A combination of anorganic bovine bone loaded with rhBMP‐2 and a titanium mesh leads to comparable results, based on a retrospective case series (Butura & Galindo, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From a clinical point of view, the ability to place dental implants following a healing period after primary bone augmentation is considered as the main goal of the therapy (Butura & Galindo, ; Marx, Armentano, Olavarria, & Samaniego, ; Misch, Jensen, Pikos, & Malmquist, ; Ribeiro Filho et al., ). This was underlined by the outcomes of the present study, demonstrating that both treatment modalities were successful and allowed placing dental implants in all sites (except in one patient where an autogenous bone block failed).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Randomized, controlled clinical two‐centre study using xenogeneic block grafts loaded with recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein‐2 or autogenous bone blocks for lateral ridge augmentation

Thoma

Payer

Jakse

et al. 2017

J Clinic Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Case series suggested that combining rhBMP‐2/ACS with a titanium reinforced mesh (Hart & Bowles, ; Misch, ; Ribeiro Filho, Francischone, Oliveira, Ribeiro & do Prado, ) or with allogenic bone grafts (Misch, ) was a successful treatment option for ridge augmentation prior to implant placement. In recent years, few RCTs have corroborated the use of rhBMP‐2/ACS for ridge augmentation (Appendix S4).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of bioactive factors to enhance bone regeneration: A narrative review

Donos

Dereka

Calciolari

2019

J Clinic Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim This review critically appraises the available knowledge on the pre‐clinical and clinical use of bioactive factors for bone regeneration in the cranial and maxillofacial area. Materials and Methods The use of growth factors, amelogenins and autologous platelet concentrates (APCs) for bone regeneration was reviewed in a systematic manner. More specifically, pre‐clinical and clinical studies on ridge preservation, alveolar ridge augmentation, regeneration of peri‐implant defects and sinus augmentation models were considered. Results Amongst different bioactive factors, the highest pre‐clinical and clinical evidence of a positive effect on bone formation is associated with rhBMP‐2 and the lowest with amelogenins. While APCs seem to accelerate clinical healing and reduce postoperative discomfort, there is insufficient and contrasting evidence of a significant effect on hard tissue regeneration for the different clinical applications. Conclusions Although there is increasing evidence that bioactive factors might enhance the bone regeneration process, the great heterogeneity of the available studies and the limited number of RCTs do not allow to draw robust conclusions. Issues that still need to be investigated include the optimal carriers for bioactive agents (direct vs. indirect), the dosage, the timing of administration, as well as the possibility of combining different agents to promote synergistic effects.

show abstract

Bone augmentation of the atrophic anterior maxilla for dental implants using rhBMP-2 and titanium mesh: histological and tomographic analysis

Cited by 19 publications

References 18 publications

The application of a newly designed L‐shaped titanium mesh for GBR with simultaneous implant placement in the esthetic zone: A retrospective case series study

The application of a newly designed L‐shaped titanium mesh for GBR with simultaneous implant placement in the esthetic zone: A retrospective case series study

Randomized, controlled clinical two‐centre study using xenogeneic block grafts loaded with recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein‐2 or autogenous bone blocks for lateral ridge augmentation

The use of bioactive factors to enhance bone regeneration: A narrative review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About