The objective of this systematic review was to identify the available scientific evidence on bone substitutes (BS) compared to autogenous bone grafts (ABG) for regeneration of horizontal bone resorption in the anterior maxillary alveolar process, aiming at rehabilitation with endosseous implants. This review was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines (2020) and registered in the database PROSPERO (CRD: 42017070574) . The databases searched were PUBMED/MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, SCIENCE DIRECT, WEB OF SCIENCE, and CENTRAL COCHRANE, in the English language. The Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) and Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool were used to assess the study's quality and risk of bias. 544 papers were found. After the selection process, six studies were selected for review. A total of 182 patients were followed for a period of 6 to 48 months. The mean age of patients was 46.46 years, 152 implants were installed in the anterior region. Two studies achieved a reduced graft and implant failure rate, while the remaining four studies had no losses. It may be concluded that both the use of ABG and some BS are viable alternatives for the rehabilitation with implants in individuals with anterior horizontal bone loss. However, additional RCTs are warranted due to the limited number of papers.
Bone substitutes vs. autogenous bone graft for regeneration of the anterior maxillary alveolar process with horizontal bone resorption: systematic review
- Views Icon Views
- Share Icon Share
- Search Site
Naida Zanini Assem, Victor Fabrizio Cabrera Pazmiño, Eliana Aparecida Caliente, Gisele da Silva Dalben, Simone Soares, Joel Ferreira Santiago Júnior, Ana Lúcia Pompéia Fraga de Almeida; Bone substitutes vs. autogenous bone graft for regeneration of the anterior maxillary alveolar process with horizontal bone resorption: systematic review. J Oral Implantol 2022; doi: https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-D-22-00014
Download citation file: