Hard tissue preparation prior to dental implant placement: a four-year retrospective study

Abstract

Aim: The purpose of this study is to investigate the requirements of hard tissue preparation prior to dental implant placement.

Methods: In this retrospective study, the records of 1086 patients who referred to Mustafa Kemal University, Faculty of Dentistry, for dental implant between 2011 and 2015 were investigated. The received frequency of patients’ onlay grafting, autogenous block grafting, socket preservation, guided bone regeneration, open sinus lifting, ridge split osteotomy, alveolar distraction osteogenesis, inferior alveolar nerve repositioning were evaluated in any process of the dental implant.

Findings: 3186 dental implants in 1086 patients were included to the study. Among 295 patients, it was observed that the number of men was 144 (48.8%) and number of implants was totally 309 (47.2%) implants, while the number of grafted implants in women of 151 (51.2%) was 346 (52.8%). The numbers of grafting procedures for augmentation are as follows; 286 (43.7%) onlay grafting, 23 (3.5%) socket preservation, 9 (1.4%) guided bone regeneration, 271 (41.3%) open sinus lifting, 62 (9.5%) alveolar ridge splitting, 2 (0.3%) alveolar nerve repositioning and 2 (0.3%) distraction osteogenesis.

Conclusion: With ongoing the increasing of developments in dental implant surgery, it will be inevitable that the different grafting procedures can be carried out before and during the implantation.

Keywords

• Bone augmentation
• dental implant
• retrospective

Dental implantasyondan önce sert doku hazırlığı: dört yıllık retrospektif bir çalışma

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı dental implant yerleştirmeden önce sert doku hazırlığı gereksinimlerini araştırmaktır.

Gereç ve yöntem: Çalışmamızda Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi’ne 2011-2015 yılları arasında başvuran 1086 hasta incelendi. Dental implantasyon öncesi veya sırasında yapılan onlay greftleme, otojen blok greftleme, soket koruma, yönlendirilmiş doku rejenerasyonu, eksternal sinus tabanı yükseltme girişimi, ridge-split osteotomisi, alveolar distraksiyon osteogenezi, inferior alveolar sinir repozisyonu işlemleri her bir implant için ayrı ayrı kaydedildi.

Bulgular: 1086 hastada 3186 implant değerlendirildi. 295 hastada (% 27.1) 655 implantın herhangi bir augmentasyon prosedürü ile yerleştirildiği saptandı. Augmentasyon prosedürlerinden en az birini alan 295 hastanın 144’ü erkek iken 151’i kadındı. Erkeklerde 309 implant kadınlarda ise 346 adet implantın augmente edildiği saptandı. Augmentasyon prosedürleri genel olarak sayıları ile birlikte şöyle sıralanmaktadır. 286 implant için onlay greftleme, 23’ü için soket koruma, 9’u için yönlendirilmiş kemik rejenerasyonu, 271’i için eksternal sinus tabanı yükseltme girişimi, 62’si için ridge-split osteotomisi, 2’si için inferior alveolar sinir repozisyonu, 2’si için distraksiyon osteogenezi.

Sonuç: Dental implant cerrahisindeki gelişmelerin artmaya devam etmesiyle birlikte, implant yerleştirme işlemi öncesi veya sırasında farklı greftleme prosedürlerinin gerçekleştirilebilmesi kaçınılmazdır.

Anahtar kelimeler: Kemik augmentasyonu, dental implant, retrospektif

Keywords

• Kemik augmentasyonu
• dental implant
• retrospektif

References

1. Referans 1. Eratalay K, Demiralp B, Akincibay H, Tozum TF. Localized edentulous ridge augmentation with upside down osteotomy prior to implant placement. Dent Traumatol 2004;20:300-4.
2. Referans 2. Bernstein S, Cooke J, Fotek P, Wang HL. Vertical bone augmentation: where are we now? Implant Dent 2006;15:219-28.
3. Referans 3. Leong DJ, Oh TJ, Benavides E, Al-Hezaimi K, Misch CE et al. Comparison between sandwich bone augmentation and allogenic block graft for vertical ridge augmentation in the posterior mandible. Implant Dent 2015;24:4-12.
4. Referans 4. Mechery R, Thiruvalluvan N, Sreehari AK. Ridge split and implant placement in deficient alveolar ridge: Case report and an update. Contemp Clin Dent 2015;6:94-7.
5. Referans 5. Karkazis HC, Lambadakis J, Tsichlakis K. Cephalometric evaluation of the changes in mandibular symphysis after 7 years of denture wearing. Gerodontology 1997;14:101-5.
6. Referans 6. Tomlin EM, Nelson SJ, Rossmann JA. Ridge preservation for implant therapy: a review of the literature. Open Dent J 2014;8:66-76.
7. Referans 7. Kola MZ, Shah AH, Khalil HS, Rabah AM, Harby NM et al. Surgical templates for dental implant positioning; current knowledge and clinical perspectives. Niger J Surg 2015;21:1-5.
8. Referans 8. McAllister BS, Haghighat K. Bone augmentation techniques. J Periodontol 2007;78:377-96.

9. Referans 9. Damlar I, Erdogan O, Tatli U, Arpag OF, Gormez U et al. Comparison of osteoconductive properties of three different beta-tricalcium phosphate graft materials: a pilot histomorphometric study in a pig model. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2015;43:175-80.
10. Referans 10. Crespi R, Bruschi GB, Gastaldi G, Cappare P, Gherlone EF. Immediate Loaded Implants in Split-Crest Procedure. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2015;17 Suppl 2:e692-8.
11. Referans 11. Barbu HM, Levin L, Bucur MB, Comaneanu RM, Lorean A. A modified surgical technique for inferior alveolar nerve repositioning on severely atrophic mandibles: case series of 11 consecutive surgical procedures. Chirurgia (Bucur) 2014;109:111-6.
12. Referans 12. Doonquah L, Lodenquai R, Mitchell AD. Surgical techniques for augmentation in the horizontally and vertically compromised alveolus. Dent Clin North Am 2015;59:389-407.
13. Referans 13. Lee HJ, Lee J, Lee JT, Hong JS, Lim BS et al. Microgrooves on titanium surface affect peri-implant cell adhesion and soft tissue sealing; an in vitro and in vivo study. J Periodontal Implant Sci 2015;45:120-6.
14. Referans 14. Singh A, Daing A, Anand V, Dixit J. Two dimensional alveolar ridge augmentation using particulate hydroxyapatite and collagen membrane: A case report. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res 2014;4:151-4.
15. Referans 15. Rakhmatia YD, Ayukawa Y, Furuhashi A, Koyano K. Current barrier membranes: titanium mesh and other membranes for guided bone regeneration in dental applications. J Prosthodont Res 2013;57:3-14.
16. Referans 16. Castagna L, Polido WD, Soares LG, Tinoco EM. Tomographic evaluation of iliac crest bone grafting and the use of immediate temporary implants to the atrophic maxilla. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2013;42:1067-72.
17. Referans 17. Lundgren S, Moy P, Johansson C, Nilsson H. Augmentation of the maxillary sinus floor with particulated mandible: a histologic and histomorphometric study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:760-6.
18. Referans 18. Meloni SM, Jovanovic SA, Lolli FM, Cassisa C, De Riu G et al. Grafting after sinus lift with anorganic bovine bone alone compared with 50:50 anorganic bovine bone and autologous bone: results of a pilot randomised trial at one year. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2015;53:436-41.
19. Referans 19. Schaudy C, Vinzenz K. Osteoplastic reconstruction of severely resorbed maxilla by stack plasty: combining sinus augmentation with lateral and vertical onlay bone grafting. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2014;52:647-51.
20. Referans 20. Vina-Almunia J, Maestre-Ferrin L, Alegre-Domingo T, Penarrocha-Diago M. Survival of implants placed with the osteotome technique: an update. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2012;17:e765-8.
21. Referans 21. Jensen T, Schou S, Stavropoulos A, Terheyden H, Holmstrup P. Maxillary sinus floor augmentation with Bio-Oss or Bio-Oss mixed with autogenous bone as graft: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23:263-73.
22. Referans 22. Morjaria KR, Wilson R, Palmer RM. Bone healing after tooth extraction with or without an intervention: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2014;16:1-20.
23. Referans 23. Kim YK, Yun PY, Um IW, Lee HJ, Yi YJ et al. Alveolar ridge preservation of an extraction socket using autogenous tooth bone graft material for implant site development: prospective case series. J Adv Prosthodont 2014;6:521-7.
24. Referans 24. Sfasciotti GL, Trapani CT, Powers RM. Mandibular Ridge Augmentation Using a Mineralized Ilium Block: A Case Letter. J Oral Implantol 2015;42:215-9
25. Referans 25. Tatum H, Jr. Maxillary and sinus implant reconstructions. Dent Clin North Am 1986;30:207-29.
26. Referans 26. Scipioni A, Bruschi GB, Calesini G. The edentulous ridge expansion technique: a five-year study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1994;14:451-9.Referans 27. Bunyaratavej P, Wang HL. Collagen membranes: a review. J Periodontol 2001;72:215-29.
27. Referans 28. Kim JW, Cho MH, Kim SJ, Kim MR. Alveolar distraction osteogenesis versus autogenous onlay bone graft for vertical augmentation of severely atrophied alveolar ridges after 12 years of long-term follow-up. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2013;116:540-9.
28. Referans 29. Khajehahmadi S, Rahpeyma A, Bidar M, Jafarzadeh H. Vitality of intact teeth anterior to the mental foramen after inferior alveolar nerve repositioning: nerve transpositioning versus nerve lateralization. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2013;42:1073-8.
29. Referans 30. Ella B, Laurentjoye M, Sedarat C, Coutant JC, Masson E et al. Mandibular ridge expansion using a horizontal bone-splitting technique and synthetic bone substitute: an alternative to bone block grafting? Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014;29:135-40.
30. Referans 31. Huumonen S, Haikola B, Oikarinen K, Soderholm AL, Remes-Lyly T et al. Residual ridge resorption, lower denture stability and subjective complaints among edentulous individuals. J Oral Rehabil 2012;39:384-90.
31. Referans 32. Korpi JT, Kainulainen VT, Sandor GK, Oikarinen KS. Long-term follow-up of severely resorbed mandibles reconstructed using tent pole technique without platelet-rich plasma. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2012;70:2543-8.