We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants



Forgotten password?


Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 33 (2018), No. 4     31. July 2018
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 33 (2018), No. 4  (31.07.2018)

Page 888-894, doi:10.11607/jomi.6288, PubMed:30025006

Bone Volume Dynamics and Implant Placement Torque in Horizontal Bone Defects Reconstructed with Autologous or Xenogeneic Block Bone: A Randomized, Controlled, Split-Mouth, Prospective Clinical Trial
Lima, Rafael Guimarães / Lima, Tito Guimarães / Francischone, Carlos Eduardo / Turssi, Cecilia / Souza Picorelli Assis, Neuza Maria / Sotto-Maior, Bruno Salles
Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate volumetric stability of autologous and xenogeneic block grafts and primary stability of implants in maxillary grafted areas.
Materials and Methods: Each patient received one autologous block and xenogeneic block, both covered with a membrane. Bone thickness measurements clinically and tomographically were made before, immediately, and 6 months postoperatively. After 6 months, identical implants were placed in each grafted area, and primary stability was measured.
Results: Eight patients with anterior horizontal bone defects were selected. Clinical outcomes at 6 months postgrafting in the autologous block revealed a mean thickness of 7.4 ± 1.6 mm, with an initial mean measurement of 3.4 ± 1.7 mm and 2.6% resorption, whereas the mean in the xenogeneic block was 8.9 ± 1.5 mm, 3.3 ± 1.6 mm, and 7.3%, respectively. Tomographic evaluation of the thickness at 6 months postgrafting in the autologous block was a mean 7.8 ± 1.8 mm, with an initial mean of 3.7 ± 1.6 mm and resorption of 0%, while the mean in the xenogeneic block was 9.3 ± 1.6 mm, 3.6 ± 1.4 mm, and 2.1%, respectively. No significant difference in bone thickness was observed immediately or 6 months after the procedure. The mean implant placement torque was 32 ± 22 Ncm in the autologous block and 18 ± 9 Ncm in the xenogeneic block (P = .004).
Conclusion: Xenogeneic block was shown to be a suitable alternative to reconstruct horizontal defects in the alveolar ridge that had undergone extensive resorption, though lower insertion torques were obtained during implant placement.

Keywords: bone block graft, bone grafts, xenogeneic bone block graft