Efficacy of Ridge Augmentation with or without Ultrasonic Splitting in Pre-Implant Preparation of Narrow Alveolar Ridges Clinical, Radiographic and Histomorphologic study | ||
| Al-Azhar Assiut Dental Journal | ||
| Volume 7, Issue 2, October 2024, Pages 199-221 PDF (4.79 M) | ||
| Document Type: Review Article | ||
| DOI: 10.21608/aadj.2024.321799.1194 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Amr Mohamed Hassan Abd alah* 1; Khalid Seddiek Daifallah2; Atef Ismail Ahmed3; Emad Saad Mahmod4 | ||
| 1Department of Oral Medicine, Periodontology, Diagnosis and Dental Radiology, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Assiut Branch | ||
| 2Professor of Oral Medicine and Periodontology‏ Dean, Faculty of Dental Medicine Al-Azhar University, Assiut Branch | ||
| 31. Department of Oral Biology, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Al-Azhar University (Assiut Branch). 2. Restorative Dentistry and Basic Science department, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Petra, Amman, Jordan | ||
| 4Department of Oral Biology, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Al-Azhar University (Assiut Branch). | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Aim: This study was carried out to compare clinically, radiographically and histomorphologically between narrow alveolar ridge augmentation using allogenic bone block versus ultrasonic ridge splitting technique combined with bone chips. Subjects and methods: Twenty patients were devieded randomaly into two equal groups, by using a flip of coin as the following; Group 1: 10 Patients with narrow mandibular alveolar ridge received allogenic bone block then after 6 month Implants were placed. Group 2: 10 Patients with narrow mandibular alveolar ridge received piezo splitting technique and allogenic bone chips then after 6-month implants were placed. Clinical and radiographic parameters were gathered at baseline and 6 months after ridge augmentation. Results: There were statistically significant differences between Group I & Group II at 6,9 months regarding alveolar ridge width, peri-implant probing depth (PPD), implant stability quotient (ISQ), Changes in marginal bone loss (MBL)and bone density measurements (BD) And vice versa, no statistically significant differences at 6, 9 months in modified plaque index (mPI) and modified sulcus bleeding index (mSBI). Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study can conclude that, both techniques exhibited successful treatment outcomes in narrow alveolar ridge, ridge splitting technique seems to be a very effective modality for implant placement in narrow alveolar ridge, that this technique is a safe and predictable in thin ridge cases, finally the use of corticocancellous block allografts had given promising results, thus allowing the placement of implants of standard length and diameter, thereby improving the long-term prognosis of the implant-supported reconstruction. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Narrow alveolar ridge; bone block augmentation; ridge splitting; allogenic bone block; allogenic bone graft | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 61 PDF Download: 90 |
||
