Clinical evaluation of ridge augmentation using autogenous tooth bone graft material: case series study

Lee, Ji-Young; Kim, Young-Kyun; Yi, Yang-Jin; Choi, Joon-Ho

doi:10.5125/jkaoms.2013.39.4.156

Cited by 40 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Of these, 795 were screened based on the title and/or abstract content, and 42 were selected for full‐text assessment and inclusion in the qualitative evaluation. Finally, 34 studies (Antoun, Sitbon, Martinez, & Missika, ; von Arx & Buser, ; von Arx & Kurt, ; Assenza et al., ; Bahat & Fontanessi, ; Buser, Dula, Hirt, & Schenk, ; Chiapasco, Autelitano, Rabbiosi, & Zaniboni, ; Cordaro, Amade, & Cordaro, ; Cordaro, Torsello, Morcavallo, & di Torresanto, ; Friedmann, Strietzel, Maretzki, Pitaru, & Bernimoulin, ; Her, Kang, & Fien, ; Kfir, Kfir, & Kaluski, ; Lee, Kim, Yi, & Choi, ; Lindfors, Tervonen, Sandor, & Ylikontiola, ; Lizio, Corinaldesi, & Marchetti, ; Lorenzoni, Pertl, Polansky, Jakse, & Wegscheider, ; Louis, Gutta, Said‐Al‐Naief, & Bartolucci, ; Lyford, Mills, Knapp, Scheyer, & Mellonig, ; Mattout & Mattout, ; Meloni et al., ; Merli et al., ; Miyamoto, Funaki, Yamauchi, Kodama, & Takahashi, ; Park, Brooks, Oh, & Wang, ; Parodi, Carusi, Santarelli, & Nanni, ; Proussaefs & Lozada, , ; Proussaefs, ; Sethi & Kaus, ; Torres et al., ; Uehara et al., ; Urban, Nagursky & Lozada, ; Urban, Nagursky, Lozada, & Nagy, ; Wessing, Emmerich, & Bozkurt, ; Zitzmann, Naef, & Scharer, ) were excluded from the quantitative analysis due to lack of data, and eight studies (Annibali, Bignozzi, Sammartino, La Monaca, & Cristalli, ; Buser et al., ; Chiapasco, Abati, Romeo, & Vogel, ; Fu, Oh, Benavides, Rudek, & Wang, ; Gher, Quintero, Assad, Monaco, & Richardson, ; Nowzari & Slots, ; Park et al., ; Tawil, El‐Ghoule, & Mawla, ) that reported on the primary and secondary outcomes were meta‐analyzed. The kappa value between the two reviewers was 0.92 for titles and abstract evaluation, and 0.88 for full‐text evaluation.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of membrane exposure on guided bone regeneration: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Garcia

Dodge

Luepke

et al. 2018

Clinical Oral Implants Res

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on the findings of this study, membrane exposure after GBR procedures has a significant detrimental influence on the outcome of bone augmentation. For the edentulous ridges, the sites without membrane exposure achieved 74% more horizontal bone gain than the sites with exposure. For peri-implant dehiscence defects, the sites without membrane exposure had 27% more defect reduction than the sites with exposure.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of membrane exposure on guided bone regeneration: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Garcia

Dodge

Luepke

et al. 2018

Clinical Oral Implants Res

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Research on graft materials that can overcome the limitations of autogenous bone and other bony substitutes has led to the development of autogenous demineralized dentin matrix (ADDM), which is an ideal substitute for autogenous bone. The ADDM has excellent osteoinductive and osteoconductive abilities, and the recovery process induced by ADDM histologically resembles that induced by autogenous bone [5,6,7,8]. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the Healing Potential of Demineralized Dentin Matrix Fixed with Recombinant Human Bone Morphogenetic Protein-2 in Bone Grafts

Kim

Park

et al. 2017

Materials

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of demineralized dentin matrix (DDM) fixed with recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) through an experimental and a clinical study. Unilateral upper second and third premolars of eight beagles were extracted. A mucoperiosteal flap was elevated around the extraction socket, and a bone defect was made using a surgical drill. Each DDM was fixed with rhBMP-2, and autogenous bone was grafted at the bone defect area with a collagenous membrane. The beagles were euthanized at two, four, eight, and 12 weeks after receiving the bone graft. Block specimens involving grafted bone and surrounding natural bone were extracted. A total of 23 patients who received bone grafts using human DDM fixed with rhBMP-2 (AutoBT BMP) with implant placements (36 implants; maxilla: 14, mandible: 22) were selected. The implant stability, marginal bone loss, and clinical outcome were evaluated. Three trephine cores were harvested fourmonths after bone grafting, and histologic examination was performed. In the histological evaluation performed four weeks after the bone graft, autogenous bone showed 52% new bone formation and DDM fixed with rhBMP-2 showed 33% new bone formation. Twelve weeks after the bone graft, autogenous bone showed 75% new bone formation and DDM fixed with rhBMP-2 showed 48% new bone formation. In the clinical study, favorable osseointegration was obtained in 35 out of 36 implant sites (one case of osseointegration failure). In all cases, severe complications were not observed. Histomorphometrically, new bone formation was observed in 14.98% of the cases. The residual DDM particles were 6.22%. AutoBT BMP provides good osteoinductive and osteoconductive potential and clinical efficacy.

show abstract

“…In recent years, some cases reported that autogenous tooth bone graft material made from compromised teeth was applied in bone deficient areas and achieved a good clinical efficacy [7][8][9][10][11].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Immediate implant placement in anterior teeth with grafting material of autogenous tooth bone vs xenogenic bone

Zhang²,

Lin³

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy of the autogenous tooth bone and xenogenic bone grafted in immediate implant placement with bone defect. Methods: Thirty patients whose compromised anterior teeth need immediate implant placement were enrolled. Autogenous tooth bone made from the extracted teeth by chair-side or the xenogenic bone were used to repaired bone defect. Clinical examination, radiographic assessment about the horizontal bone change in the level of 0mm, 3mm and 6mm below the implant neck and the marginal bone loss were made immediately, 6 and 12 months after implant placement. Questionnaire of the feelings about the surgery were made at the time of removing the sutures. Results: All implants achieved the success criteria without any complications at the follow-up period. The percent of the horizontal bone change and the marginal bone loss at 6 and 12 months were almost the same between two groups (P>.05). The horizontal bone loss at the first or the latter 6 months was almost the same (P>.05). But the horizontal bone loss at the 6 mm level was less than the 0 mm and 3 mm levels at 6 and 12 months (P<.05). Meanwhile patients seem more satisfied with the autogenous tooth bone derived from the questionnaire. Conclusion: The bone volume change in the facial part of the implant after immediate placement is almost the same between two groups. Providing clinical evidence that the autogenous tooth bone made from compromised tooth can be an acceptable bone graft material.

show abstract

Clinical evaluation of ridge augmentation using autogenous tooth bone graft material: case series study

Cited by 40 publications

References 18 publications

Effect of membrane exposure on guided bone regeneration: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Effect of membrane exposure on guided bone regeneration: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Evaluation of the Healing Potential of Demineralized Dentin Matrix Fixed with Recombinant Human Bone Morphogenetic Protein-2 in Bone Grafts

Immediate implant placement in anterior teeth with grafting material of autogenous tooth bone vs xenogenic bone

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About