Bone quality at the implant site after reconstruction of a local defect of the maxillary anterior ridge with chin bone or deproteinised cancellous bovine bone.

摘要

The purpose of this study was to investigate the quality of bone at grafted implant sites in the anterior maxilla. Grafting of these sites was necessary because of insufficient bone volume in a buccopalatinal direction (width at the top of the crest 1-3mm). Reconstruction was performed with chin bone (N=5), chin bone and a resorbable Bio-Gide((R)) GBR membrane (N=5) or Bio-Oss((R)) spongiosa granules in combination with a Bio-Gide((R)) GBR membrane (N=5). Biopsies were taken prior to implantation, i.e. 3 months after grafting with chin bone, and 6 months after grafting with Bio-Oss((R)). Evaluation was done by assessing the histological and histomorphometric characteristics of full-length biopsies taken from the actual implant site. Both areas with non-vital bone and areas with apposition of bone and remodelling phenomena were observed in the chin bone group at the time of placement of the implants. Similar results were observed at implant sites reconstructed with a chin bone graft covered by a membrane. In the chin bone group without and with a GBR membrane, the mean total bone volume (TBV) was 55.2+/-6.8% and 57.7+/-11.5%, respectively; the marrow connective tissue volume (MCTV) was 44.8+/-6.8% and 42.3+/-11.5%, respectively. Remnants of the resorbable GBR membrane were not detected. In the Bio-Oss((R)) group, at implant placement some newly formed bone was observed in the connective tissue surrounding the Bio-Oss((R)) particles (mean TBV (newly formed bone) 17.6+/-14.5%), but most particles were surrounded by connective tissue. No convincing signs of remodelling were observed (mean remaining Bio-Oss((R)) volume 40.5+/-9.3%; mean MCTV 41.9+/-13.1%). No implants were lost during follow up (12 months). At the time of placement of the implants the grafting material (either chin bone or Bio-Oss((R))) is still not fully replaced by new vital bone. In case of Bio-Oss((R)), most of the grafting material is even still present. Despite these differences, the 1-year clinical results were very good and comparable between the various grafting techniques applied.