Gurler Gokhan, Delilbasi Cagri, Garip Hasan, Tufekcioglu Sukran
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Istanbul Medipol University School of Dentistry, Istanbul, Turkey. E-mail.
Saudi Med J. 2017 Dec;38(12):1207-1212. doi: 10.15537/smj.2017.12.21462.
To compare alveolar ridge splitting (ARS) and autogenous onlay bone grafting (AOBG) in atrophic jaw bones. Methods: Forty patients were included in this retrospective, parallel-group study conducted at the Istanbul Medipol University School of Dentistry, Istanbul, Turkey, between 2012-2015. The initial bone thickness was measured by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Patients were allocated into ARS (n=17) and AOGB (n=23) groups on the basis of ridge thickness and shape. Follow-up CBCT measurements to assess horizontal bone were repeated 4 to 6 months post augmentation. The diameters of the implants were recorded. Implant bone resorption was measured at one year post implant placement on panoramic radiography. Surgical complications and implant survival were evaluated. Results: The final bone width in the AOBG group was significantly higher than that in the ARS group (p=0.029). Forty-four implants were inserted in the AOGB group, whereas 33 implants were inserted in the ARS group. There was no significant difference regarding implant diameter (p=0.920). Implant survival rate was 93.9% in the ARS group and 93.1% in the AOGB group. Peri-implant bone resorption at one year was higher in the AOBG group than in the ARS group (p=0.032). There were minor surgical complications, including bad split and wound dehiscence. Conclusion: The incidence of peri-implant bone resorption for the AOGB technique was higher than that for the ARS technique, but their implant survival rates were similar.
比较萎缩性颌骨中牙槽嵴劈开术(ARS)和自体块状骨移植术(AOBG)。方法:本回顾性平行组研究纳入了2012年至2015年期间在土耳其伊斯坦布尔梅迪波尔大学牙科学院进行的40例患者。通过锥形束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)测量初始骨厚度。根据牙槽嵴厚度和形状将患者分为ARS组(n = 17)和AOGB组(n = 23)。在植骨术后4至6个月重复进行随访CBCT测量以评估水平骨。记录种植体直径。在种植体植入后一年通过全景X线摄影测量种植体骨吸收情况。评估手术并发症和种植体存活率。结果:AOGB组的最终骨宽度显著高于ARS组(p = 0.029)。AOGB组植入44颗种植体,而ARS组植入33颗种植体。种植体直径方面无显著差异(p = 0.920)。ARS组的种植体存活率为93.9%,AOGB组为93.1%。AOGB组一年时种植体周围骨吸收高于ARS组(p = 0.032)。存在轻微手术并发症,包括劈裂不良和伤口裂开。结论:AOGB技术的种植体周围骨吸收发生率高于ARS技术,但它们的种植体存活率相似。