The objective of this paper was to assess the outcome of bone graft material at alveolar bone augmentation sites combined with dental implants in postmenopausal women with compromised bone health by evaluating cone beam computerized tomography (CBCT) scans at multiple time points.CBCT scans were analyzed on 55 postmenopausal women with compromised bone health status to determine the fate of alveolar bone augmentation. CBCT scans were taken immediately after surgery and 9 and 24 months postoperatively. The patient’s medication regimens and durations were recorded, and the pixel intensity value (PIV) was measured and standardized using scoring criteria and visual assessment. Statistical analyses included 2-sample t tests for continuous variables and Fisher’s exact tests for categorical variables.Among the normal patients, 73% received a grade 2 visual score, and 27% received a grade 1 visual score. After 24 months, 45% of patients received a grade 2 score, and 27% received a grade 3 score. In the osteoporotic group receiving medication, 77% of participants received a grade 1 visual score at the 9-month postoperative evaluation, while 23% received a grade 2 score. At the 24-month assessment, 55% of patients received a grade 1 score, 41% received a grade 2 score, and only 5% received a grade 3 score. Notably, although the graft material did not remodel into native bone, it was a scaffold for implants in controlled osteoporotic patients. The study’s results show that the pixel intensity values of particulate graft materials are similar across the three different time points, suggesting that the graft material’s pixel intensity value remains constant in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. The study’s limitations include a small sample size and a restricted 24-month follow-up period. This limited time frame may need to capture long-term changes or variations in graft materials adequately. Future research should include a larger sample size and have a longer follow-up duration to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the change in graft materials between patients with normal and compromised bone health.
Skip Nav Destination
Article navigation
June 2024
CLINICAL DENTAL IMPLANT SCIENCE RESEARCH|
June 06 2024
Does the Outcome of Graft Materials at Dental Implant Sites Differ Between Patients With Normal and Compromised Bone Health?
Kavya Shankar Muttanahally, BDS, MDS, MDSc;
Kavya Shankar Muttanahally, BDS, MDS, MDSc
*
1Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Department of Growth and Development, University of Nebraska Medical Center (UNMC) College of Dentistry, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA
*Corresponding author, e-mail: [email protected]
Search for other works by this author on:
Sumit Yadav, BDS, MDS, PhD, MBA;
Sumit Yadav, BDS, MDS, PhD, MBA
2Department of Growth and Development, UNMC College of Dentistry, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA
Search for other works by this author on:
Martin A. Freilich, DDS;
Martin A. Freilich, DDS
3Department of Prosthodontics, University of Connecticut (UConn) School of Dental Medicine, Farmington, Connecticut, USA
Search for other works by this author on:
Aditya Tadinada, DDS, MDSc
Aditya Tadinada, DDS, MDSc
4UConn School of Dental Medicine, Farmington, Connecticut, USA
Search for other works by this author on:
J Oral Implantol (2024) 50 (3): 238–244.
Citation
Kavya Shankar Muttanahally, Sumit Yadav, Martin A. Freilich, Aditya Tadinada; Does the Outcome of Graft Materials at Dental Implant Sites Differ Between Patients With Normal and Compromised Bone Health?. J Oral Implantol 1 June 2024; 50 (3): 238–244. doi: https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-D-23-00078
Download citation file:
Sign in
Don't already have an account? Register
Client Account
You could not be signed in. Please check your email address / username and password and try again.
Could not validate captcha. Please try again.
Sign in via your Institution
Sign in via your Institution
290
Views
Citing articles via
Clinical report of the immediate placement implants in patients aged 80 and over: Five cases and a short review
Masachika Takiguchi, PhD, DDS, Koji Fujita, DDS, Kazumasa Yoshida, PhD, DDS
Secured Anatomy-driven Flap Extension (SAFE) for Guided Bone Regeneration: A Modified Flap Release Technique Description and Retrospective Study
Jad Majzoub, BDS, Marius Steigmann, DDS, MS, Hsun-Liang Chan, DDS, MS
Regulation of Osteogenic and Angiogenic Markers in Alkali Treated Titanium for Hard Tissue Engineering Applications
Prantik Roy Chowdhury, MDS, Dexter Kling, MDS, Michael R. Markiewicz, MDS, Paige Bothwell, MDS, Sahar Vahabzadeh, MDS
Effect of Clinical Experience on Accuracy of Implant Placement Using Dynamic Navigation and Static Guidance: an in vitro Study
Qiao Fang, DDS, MSD, Jaime Lozada, DDS, Joseph Kan, DDS, MS, Aladdin Al-Ardah, DDS, MS, Yiming Li, DDS, MSD, PhD
Survival rate and aesthetic outcomes of two-piece zirconia dental implants: A one-year single clinical trial of partially edentulous patients
Yaniv Mayer, D.M.D., Ofir Ginesin, D.M.D. M.Sc., Daniel Rotenberg, D.M.D., Liron Kabakov, D.M.D. M. Sc., Eran Gabay, D.M.D., Ph.D., Jacob Horwitz, D.M.D., Gutmacher Zvi, D.M.D., Hadar Zigdon Giladi, D.M.D, Ph.D.