» Articles » PMID: 28748521

Clinical Outcome of Alveolar Ridge Augmentation with Individualized CAD-CAM-produced Titanium Mesh

Overview
Publisher Springer
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2017 Jul 28
PMID 28748521
Citations 35
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The 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.

Methods: In 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.

Results: The 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%.

Conclusion: Within 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.

Citing Articles

Customized 3D-Printed Mesh, Membrane, Bone Substitute, and Dental Implant Applied to Guided Bone Regeneration in Oral Implantology: A Narrative Review.

Di Spirito F, Giordano F, Di Palo M, Ferraro C, Cecere L, Frucci E Dent J (Basel). 2024; 12(10).

PMID: 39452431 PMC: 11506345. DOI: 10.3390/dj12100303.


Complication, vertical bone gain, volumetric changes after vertical ridge augmentation using customized reinforced PTFE mesh or Ti-mesh. A non-inferiority randomized clinical trial.

Cucchi A, Bettini S, Tedeschi L, Urban I, Franceschi D, Fiorino A Clin Oral Implants Res. 2024; 35(12):1616-1639.

PMID: 39180274 PMC: 11629450. DOI: 10.1111/clr.14350.


Iliac crest vertical block grafts -placing outside or inside the bone contour: A cohort study.

Mertens C, Busch C, Ristow O, Hoffmann J, Wang H, Hoffmann K Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2024; 26(6):1069-1085.

PMID: 39117450 PMC: 11660518. DOI: 10.1111/cid.13370.


Alveolar bone regeneration using a 3D-printed patient-specific resorbable scaffold for dental implant placement: A case report.

Ivanovski S, Staples R, Arora H, Vaquette C, Alayan J Clin Oral Implants Res. 2024; 35(12):1655-1668.

PMID: 39109582 PMC: 11629455. DOI: 10.1111/clr.14340.


In vivo comparison of customized zirconia barriers in guided bone regeneration: An experimental study.

Tuncludemir Z, Cinar I, Avci Kupeli Z, Unlu E, Yalcin S Heliyon. 2024; 10(11):e32070.

PMID: 38933977 PMC: 11200291. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e32070.


References
1.
Boyne P . Restoration of osseous defects in maxillofacial casualities. J Am Dent Assoc. 1969; 78(4):767-76. DOI: 10.1016/s0002-8177(69)84023-7. View

2.
Lizio G, Corinaldesi G, Marchetti C . Alveolar ridge reconstruction with titanium mesh: a three-dimensional evaluation of factors affecting bone augmentation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014; 29(6):1354-63. DOI: 10.11607/jomi.3417. View

3.
Kleinheinz J, Buchter A, Kruse-Losler B, Weingart D, Joos U . Incision design in implant dentistry based on vascularization of the mucosa. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2005; 16(5):518-23. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01158.x. View

4.
Aghaloo T, Moy P . Which hard tissue augmentation techniques are the most successful in furnishing bony support for implant placement?. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008; 22 Suppl:49-70. View

5.
Rasia-dal Polo M, Poli P, Rancitelli D, Beretta M, Maiorana C . Alveolar ridge reconstruction with titanium meshes: a systematic review of the literature. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2014; 19(6):e639-46. PMC: 4259384. DOI: 10.4317/medoral.19998. View