Custom-made titanium devices as membranes for bone augmentation in implant treatment: Clinical application and the comparison with conventional titanium mesh

Sumida, Tomoki; Otawa, Naruto; Kamata, Y U; Kamakura, Satoshi; Mtsushita, Tomiharu; Kitagaki, Hisashi; Mori, Shigeo; Sasaki, Kiyoyuki; Fujibayashi, Shunsuke; Takemoto, Mitsuru; Yamaguchi, Atsushi; Sohmura, Taiji; Nakamura, Takashi; Mori, Yoshihide

doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2015.10.020

Cited by 107 publications

(124 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

121

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, Sagheb et al reported that CAD/CAM Ti‐mesh exposure occurred in 33% of the augmented sites during the healing period. Sumida et al compared the exposure rate of CAD designed custom‐made Ti‐meshes and commercial Ti‐meshes, mucosal rupture occurs for 7.7% in the custom‐made group and 23.1% in the conventional group, which demonstrated better results for custom‐made group but there was not significant difference between the two group. However, in a most recent research, Ciocca et al also evaluated the outcomes of CAD‐CAM customized titanium mesh used for prosthetically guided bone augmentation and CAD‐CAM technology used for prosthetically guided bone augmentation showed important postoperative morbidity of 66% Ti‐mesh exposure rate.…”

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 titanium mesh exposure is a common complication, with reported exposure rates between 0 and 80% in the international literature [11, 17]. Sumida et al investigated custom-made titanium devices for bone augmentation compared to conventional titanium meshes in 26 patients [15]. Mucosal rupture occurred in a patient in the custom-made group (7.7%) and 3 in the conventional group (23.1%), indicating better results for the individualized mesh, however, neither statistically nor clinically significant.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These conventional TM are designed as planar plates. Therefore, intraoperative manual shaping and bending of the premade TM according to the individual defect is necessary, which is manually challenging and time-consuming [14, 15]. Furthermore, the corners and edges of these cut and bended meshes possibly provoke damages to the gingiva and mesh exposure.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical outcome of alveolar ridge augmentation with individualized CAD-CAM-produced titanium mesh

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe augmentation of the jaw has been and continues to be a sophisticated therapy in implantology. Modern CAD-CAM technologies lead to revival of old and established augmentation techniques such as the use of titanium mesh (TM) for bone augmentation. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the clinical outcome of an individualized CAD-CAM-produced TM based on the CT/DVT-DICOM data of the patients for the first time.MethodsIn 17 patients, 21 different regions were augmented with an individualized CAD-CAM-produced TM (Yxoss CBR®, Filderstadt, Germany). For the augmentation, a mixture of autologous bone and deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) or autologous bone alone was used. Reentry with explantation of the TM and simultaneous implantation of 44 implants were performed after 6 months. Preoperative and 6-month postoperative cone beam computed tomographies (CBCT) were performed to measure the gained bone height.ResultsThe success rate for the bone grafting procedure was 100%. Thirty-three percent of cases presented an exposure of the TM during the healing period. However, premature removal of these exposed meshes was not necessary. Exposure rate in augmentations performed with mid-crestal incisions was higher than in augmentations performed with a modified poncho incision (45.5 vs. 20%, p = 0.221). In addition, exposure rates in the maxilla were significantly higher than in the mandible (66.7 vs. 8.3%, p = 0.009). Gender, smoking, periodontal disease, gingiva type, used augmentation material, and used membrane had no significant influence on the exposure rate (p > 0.05). The mean vertical augmentation was 6.5 ± 1.7 mm, and the mean horizontal augmentation was 5.5 ± 1.9 mm. Implant survival rate after a mean follow-up of 12 ± 6 months after reentry was 100%.ConclusionWithin the limits of the retrospective character of this study, this study shows for the first time that individualized CAD-CAM TM provide a sufficient and safe augmentation technique, especially for vertical and combined defects. However, the soft tissue handling for sufficient mesh covering remains one of the most critical steps using this technique.

show abstract

“…Selective laser melting creates strong parts of fused metal or ceramic powder using a high-power laser beam and is also preferred for building functional prototypes or medical implants such as facial bone or sternal bone replacements. (2, 3) PolyJet technology creates 3D prints through a process of jetting thin layers of liquid photopolymers that are instantly hardened using UV light and can incorporate multiple-materials and colors simultaneously. PolyJet is capable of producing highly complex models with smooth surfaces and thin walls (down to a resolution of 0.016 mm)(4) and is a commonly used technique for the fabrication of flexible, patient-specific anatomical models that combine several different materials.…”

Section: Printing Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Cardiac 3D Printing and its Future Directions

Vukicevic

Mosadegh

Min

et al. 2017

JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging

440

284

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

3D printing is at the crossroads of printer and materials engineering; non-invasive diagnostic imaging; computer aided design (CAD); and structural heart intervention. Cardiovascular applications of this technology development include the use of patient-specific 3D models for medical teaching, exploration of valve and vessel function, surgical and catheter-based procedural planning, and early work in designing and refining the latest innovations in percutaneous structural devices. In this review we discuss the methods and materials being used for 3D printing today. We discuss the basic principles of clinical image segmentation including co-registration of multiple imaging datasets to create an anatomic model of interest. With applications in congenital heart disease, coronary artery disease, and in surgical and catheter-based structural disease – 3D printing is a new tool that is challenging how we image, plan, and carry out cardiovascular interventions.

show abstract

Custom-made titanium devices as membranes for bone augmentation in implant treatment: Clinical application and the comparison with conventional titanium mesh

Cited by 107 publications

References 26 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

Clinical outcome of alveolar ridge augmentation with individualized CAD-CAM-produced titanium mesh

Cardiac 3D Printing and its Future Directions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About