Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 10, 2025

A Postoperative Evaluation Guideline for Computer-Assisted Reconstruction of the Mandible
Published on: January 28, 2020
Evaluation of hard tissue 3-dimensional stability around single implants placed with guided bone regeneration in the
Haida Chen1, Tianyi Gu2, Haiyan Lai1
1Resident Physician, Department of Stomatology, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, PR China.
Statement Of Problem:
Guided bone regeneration (GBR) is widely used to reconstruct peri-implant bone defects in the esthetic zone. However, the dimensional stability of this bone-biomaterial composite is not fully understood.
Purpose:
The primary aim was to evaluate the hard tissue 3-dimensional (3D) stability around single implants placed with simultaneous GBR by using deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) in the anterior maxilla and explore possible influencing factors.
Material And Methods:
The records of patients who had received implants in the anterior maxilla from January 2015 to March 2016 were reviewed retrospectively. The change in volume and thickness of the facial hard tissue were analyzed. To explore possible influencing factors, the thickness and surface area of facial graft were measured, and the time point at which implants were placed and the healing protocol were recorded. Secondary outcome measures were peri-implant marginal bone loss, bleeding on probing (BOP), and pink esthetic score (PES). Statistical analysis was conducted by using the Student t test, Mann-Whitney U test, Kruskal-Wallis test, or generalized estimating equation analysis (α=.05).
Results:
Fifty-five participants were included in this study, and no implants had been lost after 3 years. BOP was present in 10 (18.2%) participants. The mean ±standard deviation PES of all implants for this study was 11.0 ±2.1. The mean ±standard deviation percentage of residual hard tissue volume was 36.9 ±23.5%, with a significant difference found between time points before 9 months (P<.05). Type 3 implant placement (OR=1.449, P=.031) was found to have a higher percentage of residual hard tissue volume. A greater reduction of the facial hard tissue thickness was observed in participants with thicker postoperative facial grafting (OR=1.463, P=.001). No statistically significant difference was found between the facial, palatal, mesial, and distal peri-implant sites in terms of marginal bone loss (P>.05).
Conclusions:
Although single-tooth implant placement combined with GBR using DBBM in the anterior maxilla offered satisfactory esthetic and functional outcomes after a 3-year follow-up, significant hard tissue volume and thickness reduction in grafted sites was detected, especially during the initial 9-month postoperative period. This phenomenon may be correlated with the timing of implant placement and the thickness of the facial graft.
More Related Videos
05:54Real-Time Dynamic Navigation System for the Precise Quad-Zygomatic Implant Placement in a Patient with a Severely Atrophic Maxilla
Published on: October 18, 2021
08:41Calvarial Model of Bone Augmentation in Rabbit for Assessment of Bone Growth and Neovascularization in Bone Substitution Materials
Published on: August 13, 2019