Bone regeneration using titanium plate stabilization for the treatment of peri‐implant bone defects: A retrospective radiologic pilot study

• Published in: Clinical implant dentistry and related research Vol. 24; no. 6; pp. 792 - 800
• Main Authors: Duan, Deng‐Hui, Wang, Hom‐Lay, Xiao, Wu‐Cai, Liu, Zheng, Wang, En‐Bo
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Hoboken, USA John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01.12.2022; Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
• Subjects: alveolar ridge augmentation; Alveolar Ridge Augmentation - methods; Bone growth; Bone implants; Bone Regeneration; Collagen; Computed tomography; cone‐beam computed tomography; Defects; Dental Implantation, Endosseous - methods; Dental Implants; Esthetics, Dental; Guided Tissue Regeneration, Periodontal - methods; Humans; Metal plates; Pilot Projects; Regeneration; Regeneration (physiology); Retrospective Studies; Surgical implants; Titanium; Transplants & implants; Xenografts; Xenotransplantation; cone-beam computed tomography; bone regeneration; alveolar ridge augmentation; dental implants
• ISSN: 1523-0899; 1708-8208; 1708-8208
• DOI: 10.1111/cid.13139

Aim To 3‐dimensional radiographically assess the effect of titanium plate in guided bone regeneration (GBR) for the treatment of peri‐implant ridge defects in esthetic zone. Material and Methods Nineteen patients with buccal peri‐implant defects in the maxillary esthetic zone were treated with GBR using xenograft, autogenous bone, and collagen membrane. Subjects were divided into two groups: control (conventional GBR, 10 patients with 16 implants) and test (GBR with an adjunctive titanium plate; nine patients with 15 implants). Cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) images obtained immediately after and 5–7 months following GBR were used to assess buccal crestal bone level (BBL) and buccal bone thickness (BBT) at different implant levels. Results Thirty‐one implants in 19 patients were evaluated. Titanium plate exposure occurred in three cases (33.33%) of the test group. After 5–7 months, the mean BBL was located 1.48 ± 0.71 mm coronal to the platform in the test group and 0.90 ± 3.03 mm coronal to the platform in the control group (p = 0.03). The mean over all BBT (BBT‐M) was 4.16 ± 0.48 mm in the test group and 2.38 ± 0.97 mm in the control group (p < 0.01). More resorption occurred in the control group than in the test group regarding mean BBL (3.00 ± 3.11 mm vs. 0.78 ± 0.79 mm, respectively; p = 0.04), BBT‐M change (1.87 ± 1.59 mm vs. 0.56 ± 0.33 mm, respectively; p = 0.02), and percentage change in BBT‐M (40.69 ± 24.01% vs. 11.53 ± 5.86%, respectively; p < 0.01). Conclusion In the short‐term, titanium plate‐enhanced GBR maintained ridge dimensions better than conventional GBR did.