3.8 Article

Clinical evaluation of ridge augmentation using autogenous tooth bone graft material: case series study

Publisher

KOREAN ACAD ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY
DOI: 10.5125/jkaoms.2013.39.4.156

Keywords

Autogenous tooth bone graft material; Ridge augmentation

Funding

  1. Korea Healthcare Technology R&D Project, Ministry of Health and Welfare, Republic of Korea [A102065]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: Interest in bone graft material has increased with regard to restoration in cases of bone defect around the implant. Autogenous tooth bone graft material was developed and commercialized in 2008. In this study, we evaluated the results of vertical and horizontal ridge augmentation with autogenous tooth bone graft material. Materials and Methods: This study targeted patients who had vertical or horizontal ridge augmentation using AutoBT from March 2009 to April 2010. We evaluated the age and gender of the subject patients, implant stability, adjunctive surgery, additional bone graft material and barrier membrane, post-operative complication, implant survival rate, and crestal bone loss. Results: We performed vertical and horizontal ridge augmentation using powder-or block-type autogenous tooth bone graft material, and implant placement was performed on nine patients (male: 7, female: 2). The average age of patients was 49.88 +/- 12.98 years, and the post-operative follow-up period was 35 +/- 5.31 months. Post-operative complications included wound dehiscence (one case), hematoma (one case), and implant osseointegration failure (one case; survival rate: 96%); however, there were no complications related to bone graft material, such as infection. Average marginal bone loss after one-year loading was 0.12 +/- 0.19 mm. Therefore, excellent clinical results can be said to have been obtained. Conclusion: Excellent clinical results can be said to have been obtained with vertical and horizontal ridge augmentation using autogenous tooth bone graft material.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available