Citation Information :
Mondal C, Mohanty R, Rana P, Khader AA, BS HR, Alqutub AW. Quality and Success of Bone Graft from Two Different Mandibular Sites Compared for Maxillary Ridge Augmentation: A Systematic Review. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024; 25 (7):703-710.
Aim: This systematic review was undertaken to compare the quality of autogenous bone graft harvested from two different mandibular donor sites, that is, from the chin region and from posterior mandibular region for maxillary alveolar ridge augmentation and success after implant placement.
Materials and methods: Systematic searches were performed using PubMed, MEDLINE, and Cochrane electronic databases, which reported on the quality of autogenous harvested bone graft of the recipient site in maxillary alveolar ridge augmentation from a period of January 1995 to December 2020 using PRISMA guidelines. Studies were included if: They reported on bone grafts harvested from the chin and body region of the mandible. Time and nature of postoperative complications were reported. Quality comparison of autogenous bone graft from both chin and posterior mandible was done from the analysis of extracted data of all articles. The risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane risk of bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.
Results: Out of the eight studies that have been included, five studies concluded that graft from the retromolar region of the mandible produced better quality bone graft compared with graft from the chin region. In contrast, two studies showed the opposite that graft from the chin is better in quality than the graft from the retromolar region. Whereas one study mentioned not being able to find any significant difference in the quality of two grafts. The implant placement also showed a maximum success rate in the retromolar region compared with the chin region in four studies whereas in one study, the success rate was better in the chin region and in three studies, no significant difference could be found in the success rate of implant placement in two different graft regions taken from two different donor sites of the mandible.
Conclusion: This systematic review demonstrates that the retromolar group has shown better results for ridge augmentation in the maxilla compared with the chin group. The retromolar group also produces better and more successful implant placement with fewer chances of failure compared with the chin group.
Clinical significance: In oral surgery, the use of dental implants for partial and complete edentulous jaw rehabilitation is standard procedure. Both hard and soft tissues must be present in adequate quantity and quality for implant dentistry to produce the best results. Patients with resorbed jaws can receive implant-supported restorations by a variety of reconstructive methods, such as tissue regeneration and the use of vascularized or nonvascularized grafts.
Hjørting-Hansen E. Bone grafting to the jaws with special reference to reconstructive preprosthetic surgery. A historical review. Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir 2002;6(1):6–14. DOI: 10.1007/s10006-001- 0343-6.
Arigbede AO, Babatope BO, Bamidele MK. Periodontitis and systemic diseases: A literature review. J Indian Soc Periodontol 2012;16(4):487. DOI: 10.4103/0972-124X.106878.
Clavero J, Lundgren S. Ramus or chin grafts for maxillary sinus inlay and local onlay augmentation: Comparison of donor site morbidity and complications. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2003;5(3):154–160. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2003.tb00197.x.
Al Shetawi AH, Buchbinder D. Mandibular reconstruction. Contemp Oral Oncol 2017;3:65–96. Available from: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-43854-2.
Miceli ALC, Pereira LC, da Silva Torres T, et al. Mandibular reconstruction with lateral tibial bone graft: An excellent option for oral and maxillofacial surgery. Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr 2017;10(4):292–298. DOI: 10.1055/s-0036-1593475.
Dasari MR, Babu VR, Apoorva C, et al. Correction of secondary alveolar clefts with iliac bone grafts. Contemp Clin Dent 2018;9(Suppl 1):S100. DOI: 10.4103/ccd.ccd_109_18.
Mohan R, Singh A, Gundappa M. Three-dimensional imaging in periodontal diagnosis – Utilization of cone beam computed tomography. J Indian Soc Periodontol 2011;15(1):11. DOI: 10.4103/0972-124X.82256.
Bagavad Gita V, Chandrasekaran SC. Hard and soft tissue augmentation to enhance implant predictability and esthetics: ‘The perio-esthetic approach.’ J Indian Soc Periodontol 2011;15(1):59. DOI: 10.4103/0972-124X.82276.
Janjua OS, Qureshi SM, Shaikh MS, et al. Autogenous tooth bone grafts for repair and regeneration of maxillofacial defects: A narrative review. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2022;19(6):3690. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19063690.
Iaquinta MR, Mazzoni E, Bononi I, et al. Adult Stem cells for bone regeneration and repair. Front Cell Dev Biol 2019;7:1–15. Available from: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/cell-and-developmental-biology/articles/10.3389/fcell.2019.00268/full.
Starch-Jensen T, Deluiz D, Deb S, et al. Harvesting of autogenous bone graft from the ascending mandibular ramus compared with the chin region: A systematic review and meta-analysis focusing on complications and donor site morbidity. J Oral Maxillofac Res 2020;11(3):e1. DOI: 10.5037/jomr.2020.11301.
Misch CM, Misch CE. The repair of localized severe ridge defects for implant placement using mandibular bone grafts. Implant Dent 1995;4(4):261–267. DOI: 10.1097/00008505-199500440-00006.
Pikos MA. Block autografts for localized ridge augmentation: Part II. The posterior mandible. Implant Dent 2000;9(1):67–75. DOI: 10.1097/00008505-200009010-00012.
Raghoebar GM, Meijndert L, Kalk WWI, et al. Morbidity of mandibular bone harvesting: A comparative study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007;22(3):359–365. PMID: 17622001.
Sakkas A, Wilde F, Heufelder M, et al. Autogenous bone grafts in oral implantology—Is it still a “gold standard”? A consecutive review of 279 patients with 456 clinical procedures. Int J Implant Dent 2017;3(1):23. DOI: 10.1186/s40729-017-0084-4.
Khoshhal S, Hedayatipanah M, Vafaee F, et al. Mandibular anterior ridge augmentation using chin graft: A clinical report. Int J Med Res Prof 2016;2(6):154–157. DOI: 10.21276/ijmrp.2016.2.6.031.
Zhao R, Yang R, Cooper PR, et al. Bone grafts and substitutes in dentistry: A review of current trends and developments. Molecules 2021;26(10):3007. DOI: 10.3390/molecules26103007.
Kim S, Hwang JJ, Cho BH, et al. Three-dimensional analysis of bone volume change at donor sites in mandibular body bone block grafts by a computer-assisted automatic registration method: A retrospective study. Appl Sci (Switzerland) 2022;12(14):7261. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362140749_Three-Dimensional_Analysis_of_Bone_Volume_Change_at_Donor_Sites_in_Mandibular_Body_Bone_Block_Grafts_by_a_Computer-Assisted_Automatic_Registration_Method_A_Retrospective_Study.
EL Morsy OA, Barakat A, Mekhemer S, et al. Assessment of 3-dimensional bone augmentation of severely atrophied maxillary alveolar ridges using patient-specific poly ether-ether ketone (PEEK) sheets. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2020;1–8. DOI: 10.1111/cid. 12890.
Pereira RS, Pavelski MD, Griza GL, et al. Prospective evaluation of morbidity in patients who underwent autogenous bone-graft harvesting from the mandibular symphysis and retromolar regions. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2019;21(4):753–757. DOI: 10.1111/cid.12789.
Almahrous G, David-Tchouda S, Sissoko A, et al. Patient-reported outcome measures (proms) for two implant placement techniques in sinus region (bone graft versus computer-aided implant Surgery): A randomized prospective trial. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020;17(9):2990. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17092990.
Nazir MA. Prevalence of periodontal disease, its association with systemic diseases and prevention. Int J Health Sci (Qassim) 2017;11(2):72–80. PMID: 28539867.
Nkenke E, Neukam FW. Autogenous bone harvesting and grafting in advanced jaw resorption: Morbidity, resorption and implant survival. Eur J Oral Implantol 2014;7 (Suppl 2):S203–217. PMID: 24977256.
Wushou A, Luo Y, Cheng Q Tao, et al. Using autogenous tooth sticky bone graft repair mandibular third molar dentigerous cyst osseous defects. BMC Oral Health 2024;24(1):39. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-023-03673-w.
Scarano A, Degidi M, Iezzi G, et al. Maxillary sinus augmentation with different biomaterials: A comparative histologic and histomorphometric study in man. Implant Dent 2006;15(2):197–207. DOI: 10.1097/01.id.0000220120.54308.f3.
Chiapasco M, Abati S, Romeo E, et al. Clinical outcome of autogenous bone blocks or guided bone regeneration with e-PTFE membranes for the reconstruction of narrow edentulous ridges. Clin Oral Implants Res 1999;10(4):278–288. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10551070/.
Booij A, Raghoebar GM, Jansma J, et al. Morbidity of chin bone transplants used for reconstructing alveolar defects in cleft patients. Cleft Palate-Craniofac J 2005;42(5):533–538. DOI: 10.1597/03-158.1.
Felice P, Pellegrino G, Checchi L, et al. Vertical augmentation with interpositional blocks of anorganic bovine bone vs. 7-mm-long implants in posterior mandibles: 1-year results of a randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010;21(12):1394–1403. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01966.x.
Schwartz-Arad D, Ofec R, Eliyahu G, et al. Long term follow-up of dental implants placed in autologous onlay bone graft. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2016;18(3):449–461. DOI: 10.1111/cid.12288.
Verdugo F, Sáez-Rosón A, Uribarri A, et al. Bone microbial decontamination agents in osseous grafting: An in vitro study with fresh human explants. J Periodontol 2011;82(6):863–871. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2010.100514.
Diaz-Rodriguez P, López-Álvarez M, Serra J, et al. Current stage of marine ceramic grafts for 3d bone tissue regeneration. Mar Drugs 2019;17(8):471. DOI: 10.3390/md17080471.
Pommer B, Tepper G, Gahleitner A, et al. New safety margins for chin bone harvesting based on the course of the mandibular incisive canal in CT. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008;19(12):1312–1316. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01590.x.
Nóia CF, Ortega-Lopes R, Ricardo De Albergaria Barbosa J, et al. Evaluation of patients’ perceptions of alterations after chin bone graft harvesting. Implant Dent 2012;21(5):411–414. DOI: 10.1097/ID.0b013e31826a4f9c.