While DO provides the greatest vertical bone gain, the GBR techniques might be a more clinically practical option, however, future well-planned RCTs to identify effective vertical bone augmentation techniques are still warranted.
Abstract
Background: Dental implants placement in long-standing edentulous areas often encounter the problem of alveolar height deficiency from gradual bone resorption over time. Therefore, vertical bone augmentation prior to implant placement would be much needed.Objectives: To compare the effectiveness of various vertical ridge augmentation techniques.
Methods: This review followed the PRISMA guideline. Electronic and manual searches of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were conducted through the MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Embase, and Scopus databases. The primary outcome was vertical bone gain. Secondary outcomes were bone resorption, complications, implant survival, and success rates. The Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool version 2 was used for quality assessment.
Results: Data analyses of the 29 included studies indicated that distraction osteogenesis (DO) provided the highest final vertical bone gain (8.38±1.74 mm.) followed by inlay bone grafting (2.69±0.37 to 7.00±1.76 mm) and guided bone regeneration (GBR) (1.50±1.60 to 6.86±0.94 mm). The highest degree of bone resorption was observed with onlay bone grafting (0.60±0.70 to 4.77±1.67 mm). The DO and GBR techniques demonstrated 20-60% and 0-47% complication rates, respectively. Implant survival and success rates for all ridge augmentation techniques were over 90% and 60%, respectively.
Conclusions: From this study, all vertical bone augmentation techniques can effectively increase the alveolar ridge height. While DO provides the greatest vertical bone gain, the GBR techniques might be a more clinically practical option. However, future well-planned RCTs to identify effective vertical bone augmentation techniques are still warranted.
Aim
To compare the clinical effectiveness, radiographic bone fill, safety, and patient-reported outcomes of autografts,
allografts, xenografts, and alloplasts used in the regenerative treatment of periodontal intrabony and furcation defects.
Methods
A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science (1990–2025) identified 47 eligible studies
(31 randomized controlled trials and 16 prospective cohort studies) involving 1,247 defects. Primary outcomes
included probing pocket depth (PPD) reduction, clinical attachment level (CAL) gain, and radiographic bone fill.
Secondary outcomes were postoperative pain, graft-related complications, and patient satisfaction in terms of
functional improvement. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools.
Results
Autografts achieved the highest mean bone fill (62.3%; 95% CI: 58.2–66.4) but were associated with donor-site
morbidity and greater postoperative pain. Allografts, particularly when combined with enamel matrix derivative,
demonstrated comparable bone fill (58.7%; 95% CI: 55.1–62.3) without the need for a second surgical site. Xenografts
showed lower bone fill (53.1%; 95% CI: 49.8–56.4) but provided superior long-term volume stability due to slower
resorption. Alloplasts performed favorably in contained two- and three-wall defects but exhibited particle migration
in approximately 8% of one-wall defects. Patient-reported discomfort was lowest with xenografts and alloplasts.
Smoking adversely affected regenerative outcomes, reducing bone fill by 18–25% across all graft types.
Conclusions
No graft material demonstrated universal superiority. Autografts remain the benchmark for extensive defects in nonsmokers, while allografts combined with enamel matrix derivative offer a favorable balance between efficacy and
morbidity. Xenografts provide predictable volume maintenance, and alloplasts represent a cost-effective option for
contained defects in selected patients.
M. Andhare, Krutika Bidkar, Priyanka B Vhanmane et al.· International Journal of Dru...· 0 citations
Background: Short dental implants (≤6 mm) are increasingly used for posterior rehabilitation in patients with limited alveolar bone height. This review examines their survival rates, marginal bone loss (MBL), peri-implantitis, and technical/prosthetic complications compared with standard-length implants. Methods: A narrative review of the literature was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases. Search terms included 'short dental implants', 'posterior edentulism', 'survival rates', 'marginal bone loss', 'peri-implantitis', and 'bone augmentation'. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and prospective and retrospective clinical studies published between 2018 and 2024 were included. Studies were selected based on implant intrabony length of ≤6 mm, a minimum follow-up of 12 months, and reporting of at least one primary outcome. Results: Evidence from a meta-analysis of 16 RCTs (408 short implants; 475 standard-length implants) demonstrates statistically higher survival rates for longer implants (99.4% vs. 95.1%; 95% CI: 2–5%, p < 0.001), though no significant difference was found in early or late implant failure rates. MBL was marginally but non-significantly lower for short implants (0.23 mm vs. 0.27 mm). Peri-implantitis prevalence (0–6% vs. 0–13%) and technical/prosthetic complication rates were comparable between groups. Crown-to-implant ratios of 1.55–1.86 in short implants did not translate to elevated complication rates when prostheses were splinted. A systematic review and meta-analysis of 13 RCTs confirmed equivalent survival at all follow-up intervals without the need for bone augmentation. Conclusions: Short dental implants represent a valid, minimally invasive alternative to bone augmentation in appropriately selected patients. Optimal outcomes depend on modern nano-structured implant surfaces, adequate prosthetic splinting, bone quality assessment, and rigorous peri-implant maintenance. Further long-term RCTs with standardized peri-implantitis criteria are needed.
Malik Hina, Tausif Ahmed Shaikh, Ameena Abdussalam et al.· Saudi Journal of Oral and De...· 0 citations
Background Alveolar bone loss following tooth extraction remains one of the main challenges in implant dentistry. To counteract the physiological resorption that occurs post‐extraction, regenerative techniques such as alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) and guided bone regeneration (GBR) have been developed. These approaches use bone graft materials and barrier membranes to preserve or restore alveolar architecture, facilitating optimal implant placement. Objective This systematic review aims to critically evaluate the most relevant and methodologically robust clinical studies comparing the effectiveness of ARP and GBR techniques. Specific attention is given to membrane types, graft materials, surgical timing, and soft tissue management strategies, assessing their impact on biological, functional, and esthetic outcomes. Methods Fourteen high‐quality randomized controlled trials were selected and analyzed. Key outcome measures included vertical and horizontal bone gain, implant survival rates, soft tissue stability, postoperative complications, and patient‐reported satisfaction. Results Modern resorbable membranes demonstrate comparable bone regeneration outcomes to nonresorbable ones, while minimizing surgical invasiveness. Titanium mesh offers superior bone gain in complex defects but is associated with a higher complication rate. Early intervention may improve outcomes. The choice of graft material influences both osteogenic potential and structural stability. However, generalizability is limited by small sample sizes, short follow‐up periods, and exclusion of patients with systemic comorbidities. Conclusions Successful alveolar regeneration requires a personalized treatment approach, considering defect morphology and individual patient characteristics. Future research should prioritize larger, long‐term, multicenter studies that include real‐world patient populations to support the development of more predictive and patient‐centered clinical protocols.
A. Inchingolo, G. Marinelli, Pietro Lauria et al.· International Journal of Den...· 0 citations
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
The socket shield technique (SST) has been proposed to preserve the buccal bone plate and peri-implant soft tissues during immediate implant placement, potentially improving esthetic outcomes. While its biological rationale has been well supported, comparative evidence with conventional protocols remains heterogeneous.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of SST and conventional immediate implant placement (CIP) by assessing implant survival, marginal bone loss (MBL), buccal bone thickness, pink esthetic score (PES), soft tissue changes, and complications.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A systematic review was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines across 6 electronic databases up to July 2025. Comparative clinical studies with a minimum follow-up of 3 months evaluating SST versus CIP were included.
RESULTS
Eleven studies involving 423 implants were included. Implant survival rates exceeded 95% in both groups. SST showed significantly less buccal and crestal bone loss and consistently higher PES scores across short- and long-term follow-up. The technique improved peri-implant soft tissue contours and reduced midfacial recession. SST-related complications, such as mobility or exposure, were infrequent and mostly linked to surgical error or poor patient selection.
CONCLUSIONS
SST offers better outcomes than CIP without compromising implant survival. However, it is technique-sensitive and demands careful execution. Digital workflows and guided shield preparation may enhance predictability, but further high-quality, long-term studies are needed to support clinical standardization.
S. Cosola, M. Asadi, Massimo Natale et al.· The Journal of prosthetic de...· 0 citations
The Bone Ring Technique (BRT) is a newer viable option for restoring complex defects around dental implants with three-dimensional bone augmentation with significant height and width augmentation of buccal bone.
Priyadharshini Annamalai Senthur Pandian, Aniz Amanullah, Lakshmiganthan Mahalingam et al.· Journal of Clinical and Diag...· 0 citations
Insufficient bone width is a common obstacle when placing dental implants. Numerous methods have been devised to enhance bone thickness. Autogenous bone is considered the benchmark material owing to its superior properties. The split bone block technique showed favorable results in bone gain, although donor site morbidity and the need for a second surgical site were major concerns. The study aimed to assess bone augmentation in the anterior mandible, using the symphysis as both the donor and recipient site, while the original technique required two surgeries. This prospective, single-center, formal consecutive case series study focused on outcomes and involved 11 patients, each having a bone width of less than 4 mm in the anterior mandibular area. Patients underwent a procedure for horizontal ridge augmentation, with implants being placed after a four-month interval. The study assessed the healing of the surgical site, reported complications, and measured pain levels using a visual analogue scale. It evaluated bone gain in width, primary stability, secondary stability of implants, short-term implant success, and augmented bone stability. The current study revealed postoperative swelling occurred in 45.5% of patients, while hematoma and flap dehiscence were each observed twice. Visual Analog Scale pain scores decreased over two weeks (P < 0.001). Mean radiographic bone width increased from (3.27 ± 0.80 mm) preoperatively to (5.88 ± 0.82 mm) at 4 months (P < 0.001). Furthermore, mean implant stability quotient scores improved from 72.80 (3.94) to 88.90 (2.10) (P < 0.001). The short-term implant success was 90.9%, and the mean linear augmented bone stability was 88.41% ± 6.24% (median: 90.57%), with individual values ranging from a minimum of 74.39% to a maximum of 94.57%. The findings of this preliminary case series suggest that the auto-augmentation technique from the mandibular symphysis is a technically feasible protocol for horizontal ridge augmentation. By confining the surgery to a single localized window, it achieves adequate bone gain while minimizing donor-site trauma and optimizing patient recovery profiles. The trial was registered on 12/09/2024 at clinicaltrials.gov (ID: NCT06727591).
Hossam Saleh, R. Eldibany, Dina M N Metawie· BMC Oral Health· 0 citations