The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 25 , ISSUE 2 ( February, 2024 ) > List of Articles


Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Autogenous Inlay Graft vs Autogenous Onlay Graft for Anterior Maxillary Horizontal Ridge Augmentation: A Randomized Control Clinical Study

Ahmed O Elsayed, Fakhreldin H Abdel-Rahman, Wael MAS Ahmed, Mohamed A-M Tawfik

Keywords : Autogenous inlay graft, Autogenous onlay graft, Deficient anterior maxilla, Horizontal ridge augmentation

Citation Information : Elsayed AO, Abdel-Rahman FH, Ahmed WM, Tawfik MA. Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Autogenous Inlay Graft vs Autogenous Onlay Graft for Anterior Maxillary Horizontal Ridge Augmentation: A Randomized Control Clinical Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024; 25 (2):107-113.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3634

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 14-03-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2024; The Author(s).


Aim: This study aimed to compare the efficacy of autogenous onlay and inlay grafts for anterior maxillary horizontal ridge augmentation. Materials and methods: This randomized clinical trial was performed on 14 patients with a deficient partially edentulous anterior maxillary ridge (3–5 mm in width). Patients were randomized and grouped into two equal groups: Group A was treated with symphyseal autogenous bone block, which was placed and fixed buccally as an onlay graft, and group B: was treated with symphyseal autogenous bone block, which was interpositioned and fixed in space created between buccal and lingual cortex as inlay graft. Patients were evaluated clinically and radiographically to evaluate the increase of bone width at [Baseline, immediate postoperative (T0)] and six months post-graft (T6). Results: A total of 14 patients (8 males and 6 females) with age range from 20 to 43 years old with a mean of 42.1 years were involved in our study. Radiographically, there was a significant statistical difference in comparing between two groups for the creation of a horizontal alveolar bone at T0. In the inlay group, the mean preoperative bone width was 3.9 ± 0.3 mm at T0 and 5.7 ± 0.5 mm at T6. While in the onlay group, the mean preoperative bone width was 3.7 ± 0.7 mm at T0 while at T6 the mean bone width was 6.1 ± 0.8 mm. This was statistically significant. Conclusion: Inlay block graft appears to be a successful treatment option for horizontal ridge augmentation in the maxillary arch. Clinical significance: both techniques are viable techniques for augmentation of atrophic alveolar ridge with uneventful healing.

PDF Share
  1. Chiapasco M, Casentini P, Zaniboni M. Bone augmentation procedures in implant dentistry. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009;24(Suppl):237–259. PMID: 19885448.
  2. Tan WL, Wong TLT, Wong MCM, et al. A systematic review of post-extractional alveolar hard and soft tissue dimensional changes in humans. Clinical oral implants research 2012;23(Suppl 5):1–21. DOI:
  3. Chu SJ, Tarnow DP. Managing esthetic challenges with anterior implants. Part 1: Midfacial recession defects from etiology to resolution. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2013;34 Spec No 7:26–31. PMID: 24564678.
  4. Ashman A, LoPinto J, Rosenlicht J. Ridge augmentation for immediate postextraction implants: Eight year retrospective study. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 1995;7(2):85–94. PMID: 7670079.
  5. Aghaloo TL, Moy PK. Which hard tissue augmentation techniques are the most successful in furnishing bony support for implant placement? Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007;22(Suppl):49–70. PMID: 18437791.
  6. Liu J, Kerns DG. Mechanisms of guided bone regeneration: A review. Open Dent J 2014;8:56–65. DOI: 10.2174/1874210601408010056.
  7. Ella B, Laurentjoye M, Sedarat C, et al. Mandibular ridge expansion using a horizontal bone-splitting technique and synthetic bone substitute: An alternative to bone block grafting? Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014;29(1):135–140. DOI: 10.11607/jomi.2201.
  8. Liou EJ-W, Chen PKT, Huang CS, et al. Orthopedic intrusion of premaxilla with distraction devices before alveolar bone grafting in patients with bilateral cleft lip and palate. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 2004;113(3):818–826. DOI:
  9. Louis PJ, Gutta R, Said-Al-Naief N, et al. Reconstruction of the maxilla and mandible with particulate bone graft and titanium mesh for implant placement. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2008;66(2):235–245. DOI:
  10. Misch CM. Use of the mandibular ramus as a donor site for onlay bone grafting. J Oral Implantol 2000;26(1):42–49. DOI:;2.
  11. Bell RB, Blakey GH, White RP, et al. Staged reconstruction of the severely atrophic mandible with autogenous bone graft and endosteal implants. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2002;60(10):1135–1141. DOI:
  12. Montazem A, Valauri DV, St-Hilaire H, et al. The mandibular symphysis as a donor site in maxillofacial bone grafting: A quantitative anatomic study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2000;58(12):1368–1371. DOI:
  13. Güngörmüş M, Yavuz MS. The ascending ramus of the mandible as a donor site in maxillofacial bone grafting. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2002;60(11):1316–1318. DOI:
  14. Hunt DR, Jovanovic SA. Autogenous bone harvesting: A chin graft technique for particulate and monocortical bone blocks. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1999;19(2):165–173. PMID: 10635182.
  15. Clementini M, Morlupi A, Agrestini C, et al. Success rate of dental implants inserted in autologous bone graft regenerated areas: A systematic review. Oral Implantol (Rome) 2011;4(3–4):3–10. PMID: 23277867.
  16. Von Arx T, Buser D. Horizontal ridge augmentation using autogenous block grafts and the guided bone regeneration technique with collagen membranes: A clinical study with 42 patients. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006;17(4):359–366. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01234.x.
  17. Restoy-Lozano A, Dominguez-Mompell JL, Infante-Cossio P, et al. Reconstruction of mandibular vertical defects for dental implants with autogenous bone block grafts using a tunnel approach: Clinical study of 50 cases. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2015;44(11):1416–1422. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2015.05.019.
  18. Koymen R, Karacayli U, Gocmen-Mas N, et al. Flap and incision design in implant surgery: Clinical and anatomical study. Surg Radiol Anat 2009;31(4):301–306. DOI: 10.1007/s00276-008-0431-5.
  19. Yuce MO, Adali E, Turk G, et al. Three-dimensional bone grafting in dental implantology using autogenous bone ring transplant: Clinical outcomes of a one-stage technique. Niger J Clin Pract 2019;22(7): 977–981. DOI: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_652_18.
  20. Felice P, Marchetti C, Iezzi G, et al. Vertical ridge augmentation of the atrophic posterior mandible with interpositional bloc grafts: Bone from the iliac crest vs. bovine anorganic bone. Clinical and histological results up to one year after loading from a randomized-controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20(12):1386–1393. DOI:
  21. Jensen SS, Broggini N, Hjørting-Hansen E, et al. Bone healing and graft resorption of autograft, anorganic bovine bone and β-tricalcium phosphate. A histologic and histomorphometric study in the mandibles of minipigs. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006;17(3):237–243. DOI:
  22. Schwarz F, Hazar D, Becker K, et al. Short-term outcomes of staged lateral alveolar ridge augmentation using autogenous tooth roots. A prospective controlled clinical study. J Clin Periodontol 2019;46(9):969–976. DOI:
  23. Mc Allister BS, Haghighat K. Bone augmentation techniques. J Periodontol 2007;78(3):377–396. DOI:
  24. Chiapasco M, Zaniboni M, Boisco M. Augmentation procedures for the rehabilitation of deficient edentulous ridges with oral implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006;17(Suppl 2):136–159. DOI:
  25. Nissan J, Mardinger O, Strauss M, et al. Implant-supported restoration of congenitally missing teeth using cancellous bone block-allografts. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2011;111(3):286–291. DOI:
  26. Tolstunov L, Hicke B. Horizontal augmentation through the ridge-split procedure: A predictable surgical modality in implant reconstruction. J Oral Implantol 2013;39(1):59–68. DOI:
  27. Milinkovic I, Cordaro L. Are there specific indications for the different alveolar bone augmentation procedures for implant placement? A systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2014;43(5):606–625. DOI:
  28. Simion M, Baldoni M, Zaffe D. Jawbone enlargement using immediate implant placement associated with a split-crest technique and guided tissue regeneration. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1992;12(6):1–15. DOI:
  29. Oppenheimer AJ, Tong L, Buchman SR. Craniofacial bone grafting: Wolff's law revisited. Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr 2008;1(1): 49–61. DOI:
  30. Rosenthal AH, Buchman SR. Volume maintenance of inlay bone grafts in the craniofacial skeleton. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003;112(3):802–811. DOI:
  31. Sugg KB, Rosenthal AH, Ozaki W, et al. Quantitative comparison of volume maintenance between inlay and onlay bone grafts in the craniofacial skeleton. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013;131(5):1014–1021. DOI:
  32. Cortellini P, Prato GP, Tonetti MS. Periodontal regeneration of human infrabony defects. II. Re-8. J Periodontol 1993;64(4):261–268. DOI:
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.