| Title |
Dental Implants Placed Following Grafting in Areas with Severe Bone Resorption Can Be Successful |
| Clinical Question |
For a patient with severe ridge resorption needing an implant, would guided bone regeneration (GBR) allow for a high likelihood of implant success and survival? |
| Clinical Bottom Line |
For patients with bone dimensions insufficient for placement of a dental implant, guided bone regeneration is a valuable approach to allow placement of implants that have levels of success approaching that of standard (nonaugmented) implant placement. |
| Best Evidence |
|
| PubMed ID |
Author / Year |
Patient Group |
Study type
(level of evidence) |
| 22542079 | Clementini/2012 | 8 Studies-147 patients | Systematic review of randomized trials | | Key results | The survival and success rates for implants placed following guided bone regeneration in severely resorbed alveolar ridges approached that of conventional implant placement; however, these rates did show high levels of variability. The implant survival rate ranged from 93.75% to 100%, with success rates reported from 61.5% to 100%. This is based on 8 studies evaluating 147 patients. | |
| Evidence Search |
(("dental implants"[MeSH Terms] OR ("dental"[All Fields] AND "implants"[All Fields]) OR "dental implants"[All Fields] OR ("dental"[All Fields] AND "implant"[All Fields]) OR "dental implant"[All Fields]) AND guided[All Fields] AND ("bone regeneration"[MeSH Terms] OR ("bone"[All Fields] AND "regeneration"[All Fields]) OR "bone regeneration"[All Fields])) AND systematic[sb] |
Comments on
The Evidence |
Validity: The systemic review identified only a limited number of studies (8) with sufficient information reported to allow inclusion in the review. Seven of the eight studies were found to have a high to moderate risk of bias.
Perspective: Based on this systematic review implant therapy represents a reasonable approach to care following successful ridge augmentation. This review did not specifically address the success of the guided bone regeneration procedure itself for severely atrophic ridges. This issue represents a separate level of risk that would need to be considered prior to selecting this treatment option.
|
| Applicability |
This information can benefit a practitioner when treatment planning for a patient in need of implants and whose available bone is compromised by severe ridge resorption. |
| Specialty |
(General Dentistry) (Oral Surgery) (Periodontics) (Prosthodontics) (Restorative Dentistry) |
| Keywords |
Implants, Bone grafting, Bone resorption
|
| ID# |
2701 |
| Date of submission |
03/25/2014 |
| E-mail |
Chenausky@livemail.uthscsa.edu |
| Author |
Ryan Chenausky |
| Co-author(s) |
|
| Co-author(s) e-mail |
|
| Faculty mentor |
Thomas Oates, DMD, PhD |
| Faculty mentor e-mail |
Oates@uthscsa.edu |
| |
|
Basic Science Rationale
(Mechanisms that may account for and/or explain the clinical question, i.e. is the answer to the clinical question consistent with basic biological, physical and/or behavioral science principles, laws and research?) |
| None available | |
 |
Comments and Evidence-Based Updates on the CAT
(FOR PRACTICING DENTISTS', FACULTY, RESIDENTS and/or STUDENTS COMMENTS ON PUBLISHED CATs) |
by Mary Namy (San Antonio, TX) on 09/30/2022
I conducted a Pubmed search on this topic in Sep 2022 and found a more recent publication PubMed ID: 28916205 that further strengthens the conclusion of this CAT | |