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 22 (2007), No. 2     15. Mar. 2007
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 22 (2007), No. 2  (15.03.2007)

Page 280-288, PubMed:17465354

Augmentation of the Posterior Atrophic Edentulous Maxilla with Implants Placed in the Ulna: A Prospective Single-Blind Controlled Clinical Trial
Cannizzaro, Gioacchino / Leone, Michele / Consolo, Ugo / Ferri, Vittorio / Licitra, Giorgio / Worthington, Helen / Esposito, Marco
Purpose: To evaluate a new method to treat the posterior atrophic edentulous maxilla: dental implants placed in the ulna and transplanted with their surrounding bone blocks as inlays into the sinus. Conventional sinus augmentation with particulated autogenous bone grafts served as a control procedure.
Materials and Methods: Fifty-two implants were placed in the ulnas of 20 patients. After 6 weeks, bone blocks containing 1 to 3 implants were harvested and transplanted into the sinuses protruding 3 to 4 mm. Implants were left to heal for 6 weeks. Twenty patients with similar treatment indications treated with particulated bone grafts from the mental symphysis, tibia, or iliac crest acted as controls. Grafts were allowed to heal for 6 months in the control group. Fifty-two control-group implants were allowed to heal for 4 months. The main outcome measures were prosthetic and implant success. Stability of individual implants was assessed with Osstell and Periotest at baseline and after 6 and 12 months of loading. Independent sample chi-square tests, t tests, and paired t tests were used with a significance level of .05.
Results: No patient dropped out or withdrew; no prosthesis or implant failed. No major surgical complications were occurred. There were no differences between the 2 groups at any time point in implant stability. Both modalities resulted in a significant increase of implant stability at 6 and 12 months. The mean change (SD) from baseline to 1 year in Periotest measurements was 1.44 (0.48) in the test and 1.29 (0.58) in the control (paired t tests; P < .001). For the Osstell, these values were -5.88 (4.18) and -5.48 (3.93) for the test and control groups, respectively (paired t tests: P < .001).
Conclusions: Ulna implant block grafting represents an alternative to conventional sinus augmentation, particularly when vertical augmentation is desirable or large iliac crest grafts are needed.

Keywords: bone grafting, dental implants, sinus augmentation, ulna