Surgical Outcomes of Autogenous Block Bone Grafts and the Effects on Dental Implant Survival

Yıl 2013, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 4, 1297 - 1306, 01.01.2013

Süleyman Kaman Fethi Atıl Berkay Tolga Süer Umut Tekin İsmail Doruk Koçyiğit

Öz

Iatrogenic and congenital defects of the alveolar ridges make often impossible to perform optimal dental implant treatment without increasing alveolar bone volume prior to implant placement surgery. Although graft materials derived from different sources may be used for reconstruction, autogenous bone is still considered as the gold standard. Autogenous bone grafts have high success rate due to their high revascularization capacity, and it is known that they have no disadvantages other than the donor site morbidity and the related complications. Forty two patients who were admitted to our clinic between the years of 2008 to 2012 becuse of horizontal and/or vertical alveolar bone deficiencies were included in this study. A total of 42 autogenous block grafts 34 onlay, 4 inlay, 5 interpositional , which harvested from different intraoral donor sites, were applied to the patients for reconstructing different types of alveolar ridge deficiencies. In this study, major complications such as graft expansion and graft loss, and minor complications such as haematoma, swelling, inflammation and paraesthesia that occurred during or after surgery, and implant survival rates, which were placed to the grafted sites, have been evaluated. Additionally, the success of different donor sites was discussed in accordance with the current literature

Anahtar Kelimeler

Alveolar reconstruction, autogenous graft, complication, implant

Otojen Blok Kemik Greftlerinin Cerrahi Sonuçları ve İmplant Sağ Kalımına Etkisi

Öz

İatrojenik ve konjenital alveolar kemik defektleri, planlanan optimal dental implant tedavisinin, çoğu zaman implant cerrahisi öncesinde defekt onarımı olmadan yapılmasını imkansız hale getirir. Farklı kaynaklardan elde edilen greft materyalleri bu onarımlar için kullanılsa da, altın standart halen otojen greftlerdir. Yüksek revaskularizasyon kapasitesi nedeni ile başarı oranı çok yüksek olan otojen greftlerin, alıcı saha morbiditesi ve buna bağlı komplikasyonlar dışında dezavantajlarının olmadığı bilinmektedir. Bu çalışmaya 2008-2012 yılları arasında kliniğimize başvuran ve horizontal ve/veya vertikal alveolar kemik defekti olan 42 hasta dahil edilmiştir. Bu hastalara alveolar kret onarımı için çeşitli intraoral donör sahalardan alınan; 34 onley, 5 inley ve 5 interpozisyonel, toplam 42 blok greft uygulaması yapılmıştır. Bu çalışmada, cerrahi işlem sırasında veya sonrasında oluşan majör komplikasyonlar greftin ekspansiyonu ve kaybı , minör komplikasyonlar hematom, şişlik, inflamasyon ve parestezi ve greft bölgelerine yerleştirilen implantların sağ kalım oranları değerlendirilmiştir. Bunlara ilave olarak farklı otojen greft bölgelerin başarısı literatür eşliğinde tartışılmıştır

Anahtar Kelimeler

Alveolar rekonstrüksiyon, otojen greft, komplikasyon, implant

Kaynakça

• Bernstein S., Cooke J., Fotek P., Wang HL. Vertical bone augmentation: Where are we now? Implant Dent. 15: 219-228, 2006.
• Chiapasco M., Zaniboni M., Boisco M. Augmentation procedures for the rehabilitation of deficient edentulous ridges with oral implants. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 17(Suppl.2): 136-159
• Ersu B. İmplant diş hekimliğinde kullanılan ağız içi otojen kemik greftleri. C.Ü. Diş. Hek. Fak. Derg. 10: 135-140, 2007.
• Uckan S., Veziroglu F., Dayangac E. Alveolar distraction osteogenesis versus autogenous onlay bone grafting for alveolar ridge augumentation: Technique, complications, and implant survival rates. Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol. Oral Radiol. Endod. 106: 511-515, 2008.
• Schwartz-Arad D., Levin L., Sigal L. Surgical success of intraoral autogenous block onlay bone grafting for alveolar ridge augmentation. Implant Dent. 14: 131-138, 2005.
• Hutton JE., Heath MR., Chai JY., Harnett J., Jemt T., Johns RB., McKenna S., McNamara DC., van Steenberghe D., Taylor R., et al. Factors related to success and failure rates at 3-year follow-up in a multicenter study of overdentures supported by Branemark implants. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants. 10: 33-42, 1995.
• Cordaro L., Amadé DS., Cordaro M. Clinical results of alveolar ridge augmentation with mandibular block bone grafts in partially edentulous patients prior to implant placement. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 13: 103-111, 2002.
• Sbordone L., Menchini-Fabris GB., Toti P., Sbordone C., Califano L., Guidetti F. Clinical survey of neurosensory side-effects of mandibular parasymphyseal bone harvesting. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 38: 139-145, 2009.
• Misch CE., Dietsh F. Bone-grafting materials in implant dentistry. Implant Dent. 2: 158-167, 1993.
• Marx RE. Clinical application of bone biology to mandibular and maxillary reconstruction. Clin. Plast. Surg. 21: 377-392, 1994.
• Misch CM. Comparison of intraoral donor sites for onlay grafting prior to implant placement. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants. 12: 767-776, 1997.
• Petrungaro PS., Amar S. Localized ridge augumentation with allogenic block grafts prior to implant placement: Case reports and histologic evaluations. Implant Dent. 14: 139-148, 2005. Thor A., Farzad P., Larsson S. Fracture of the tibia: Complication of bone grafting to the anterior maxilla. Br. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 44: 46-48, 2006.
• Zins JE., Whitaker LA. Membranous versus endochondral bone: Implications for craniofacial reconstruction. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 72: 778- 785, 1983.
• Morelli T., Neiva R., Wang HL. Human histology of allogeneic block grafts for alveolar ridge augmentation: Case report. Int. J. Periodontics Restorative Dent. 29: 649-656, 2009.
• Oppenheimer AJ., Tong L., Buchman SR. Craniofacial bone grafting: Wolff’s law revisited. Craniomaxillofac. Trauma Reconstr. 1: 49-61, 2008.
• Hardesty RA., Marsh JL. Craniofacial onlay bone grafting: A prospective evaluation of graft morphology, orientation, and embryonic origin. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 85: 5-14, 1990. Chen NT., Glowacki J., Bucky LP., Hong HZ., Kim WK., Yaremchuk MJ. The roles of revascularization and resorption on endurance of craniofacial onlay bone grafts in the rabbit. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 93: 714- 722, 1994. Buchman SR., Ozaki W. The ultrastructure and resorptive pattern of cancellous onlay bone grafts in the craniofacial skeleton. Ann. Plast. Surg. 43: 49-56, 1999.
• Smith JD., Abramson M. Membranous vs endochondrial bone autografts. Arch. Otolarygol. 99: 203-205, 1974.
• Brugnami F., Caiazzo A., Leone C. Local intraoral autologous bone harvesting for dental implant treatment: Alternative sources and criteria of choice. Keio J. Med. 58: 24-28, 2009.
• Aykan T. Vertikal kemik ögmentasyonu. Türkiye Klinikleri J. Dental Sci. 13: 107-113, 2007.
• Hamer AJ., Strachan JR., Black MM., Ibbotson CJ., Stockley I., Elson RA. Biochemical properties of cortical allograft bone using a new method of bone strength measurement. A comparison of fresh, fresh-frozen and irradiated bone. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br. 78: 363-368, 1996.
• Reynolds MA., Aichelmann-Reidy ME., Branch- Mays GL. Regeneration of periodontal tissue: Bone replacement grafts. Dent. Clin. North Am. 54: 55-71, 2010.
• Canalis E. Effect of growth factors on bone cell replication and differentiation. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 193: 246-263, 1985.
• Borstlap WA., Heidbuchel KL., Freihofer HP., Kuijpers-Jagtman AM. Early secondary bone grafting of alveolar cleft defects. A comparison between chin and rib grafts. J. Craniomaxillofac. Surg. 18: 201-205, 1990.
• Nkenke E., Schultze-Mosgau S., Radespiel-Troger M., Kloss F, Neukam FW. Morbidity of harvesting of chin grafts: A prospective study. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 12: 495-502, 2001.
• Simion 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. 18: 8-23, 1998.
• Sittitavornwong S., Gutta R. Bone graft harvesting from regional sites. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. Clin. North Am. 22: 317-330, 2010.
• Nanci A. Ten Cate’s oral histology: Development, structure, and function. 6th ed. St. Louis: Mosbus, Inc., 2003, 131-139.
• Alfaro FH. Bone grafting in oral implantology: Techniques and clinical applications. 1st ed. Barcelona, Spain: Quintessence Publishing; 2006, 1-234.
• Clavero J., Lundgren S. Ramus or chin grafts for maxillary sinus inlay and local onlay augmentation: Comparison of donor site morbidity and complications. Clin. Implant Dent. Relat. Res. 5: 154-160, 2003.
• Pikos MA. Mandibular block autografts for alveolar ridge augmentation. Atlas Oral Maxillofac. Surg. Clin. North Am. 13: 91-107, 2005.
• Chiapasco M., Abati S., Romeo E. Clinical outcome of autogenous bone blocks or guided bone regeneration with e-PTFE membranes for the reconstruction of narrow edentulous ridges. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 10: 278-288, 1999.
• Gellrich NC., Held U., Schoen R., Pailing T., Schromm A., Bormann KH. Alveolar zygomatic buttress: A new donor site for limited preimplant augmentation procedures. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 65: 275-280, 2007.
• Jensen J., Sindet-Pedersen S. Autogenous mandibular bone grafts and osseointegrated implants for reconstruction of the severely atrophied maxilla: A preliminary report. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 49: 1277-1287, 1991.
• Jensen OT. Alveolar segmental ‘‘sandwich’’ osteotomies for posterior edentulous mandibular sites for dental implants. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 64: 471-475, 2006.
• Jensen OT., Kuhlke L., Bedard JF., White D. Alveolar segmental sandwich osteotomy for anterior maxillary vertical augmentation prior to implant placement. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 64: 290-296, 2006.
• Jensen OT., Greer RO Jr., Johnson L., Kassebaum D. Vertical guided bone-graft augmentation in a new canine mandibular model. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants 10: 335–344, 1995.
• Maestre-Ferrin L., Boronat-Lopez A., Penarrocha- Diago M., Penarrocha-Diago M. Augmentation procedures for deficient edentulous ridges, using onlay autologous grafts: An update. Med. Oral Patol. Oral Cir. Bucal. 14: 402-407, 2009.
• von Arx T., Cochran DL., Hermann JS., Schenk RK., Buser D. Lateral ridge augmentation using different bone fillers and barrier membrane application. A histologic and histomorphometric pilot study in the canine mandible. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 12: 260-269, 2001.
• Chiapasco M., Casentini P., Zaniboni M. Bone augmentation procedures in implant dentistry. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants 24: 237-259
• Chiapasco M., Zaniboni M. Failures in jaw reconstructive surgery with autogenous onlay bone grafts for pre-implant purposes: Incidence, prevention and management of complications. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. Clin. North Am. 23: 1-15, 2011.
• Becktor JP., Isaksson S., Sennerby L. Survival analysis of endosseous implants in grafted and nongrafted edentulous maxillae. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants.19: 107-115, 2004.
• Astrand P., Nord PG., Branemark PI. Titanium implants and onlay bone graft to the atrophic edentulous maxilla: A 3-year longitudinal study. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 25: 25-29, 1996.
• Vermeeren JI., Wismeijer D., van Waas MA. One-step reconstruction of the severely resorbed mandible with onlay bone grafts and endosteal implants. A 5-year follow-up. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 25: 112-115, 1996.
• van Steenberghe D., Naert I., Bossuyt M., De Mars G., Calberson L., Ghyselen J., Branemark PI. The rehabilitation of the severely resorbed maxilla by simultaneous placement of autogenous bone grafts and implants: A 10-year evaluation. Clin. Oral Investig. 1: 102-108, 1997.
• Verhoeven JW., Cune MS., Terlou M., Zoon MA., de Putter C. The combined use of endosteal implants and iliac crest onlay grafts in the severely atrophic mandible: A longitudinal study. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 26: 351-357, 1997.
• Keller EE., Tolman DE., Eckert S. Surgical- prosthodontic reconstruction of advanced maxillary bone compromise with autogenous onlay block bone grafts and osseointegrated endosseous implants: A 12-year study of 32 consecutive patients. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants. 14: 197-209, 1999.
• Lekholm U., Wannfors K., Isaksson S. Adielsson B. Oral implants in combination with bone grafts. A 3-year retrospective multicenter study using the Branemark implant system. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 28: 181-187, 1999.
• Nyström E., Ahlqvist J., Gunne J., Kahnberg KE. 10-year follow-up of onlay bone grafts and implants in severely resorbed maxillae. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 33: 258-262, 2004.
• Triplett RG., Schow SR. Autologous bone grafts and endosseous implants: Complementary techniques. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 54: 486- 494, 1996.
• Lundgren S., Nyström E., Nilson H., Gunne J., Lindhogen O. Bone grafting to the maxillary sinuses, nasal floor and anterior maxilla in the atrophic edentulous maxilla. A two-stage technique. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 26: 428- 434, 1997. Bahat O., Fontanessi RV. Efficacy of implant placement after bone grafting for three- dimensional reconstruction of the posterior jaw. Int. J. Periodontics Restorative Dent. 21: 220- 231, 2001.
• Bell RB., Blakey GH., White RP., Hillebrand DG., Molina A. Staged reconstruction of the severely atrophic mandible with autogenous bone graft and endosteal implants. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 60: 1135-1141, 2002.
• Raghoebar GM., Schoen P., Meijer HJ., Stellingsma K., Vissink A. Early loading of endosseous implants in the augmented maxilla: A 1-year prospective study. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 14: 697-702, 2003.
• Jemt T., Lekholm U. Measurements of buccal tissue volumes at single-implant restorations after local bone grafting in maxillas: A 3-year clinical prospective study case series. Clin. Implant Dent. Relat. Res. 5: 63-70, 2003. Iizuka T., Smolka W., Hallermann W., Merickse- Stern R. Extensive augmentation of the alveolar ridge using autogenous calvarial split bone grafts for dental rehabilitation. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 15: 607-615, 2004. Levin L., Nitzan D., Schwartz-Arad D. Success of dental implants placed in intraoral block bone grafts. J. Periodontol. 78: 18-21, 2007.
• Chiapasco M., Gatti C., Gatti F. Immediate loading of dental implants placed in severely resorbed edentulous mandibles reconstructed with autogenous calvarial grafts. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 18: 13-20, 2007.
• Montazem A., Valauri DV., St-Hilaire H., Buchbinder D. The mandibular symphysis as a donor site in maxillofacial bone grafting: A quantitative anatomic study. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 58: 1368-1371, 2000.
• Güngörmüş M., Yavuz MS. The ascending ramus of the mandible as a donor site in maxillofacial bone grafting. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 60: 1316-1318, 2002.
• Choung PH., Kim SG. The coronoid process for paranasal augmentation in the correction of midfacial concavity. Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol. Oral Radiol. Endod. 91: 28-33, 2001.