Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 10, 2025
Biological Compatibility Profile on Biomaterials for Bone Regeneration
Published on: November 16, 2018
Comparison between CAD/CAM titanium mesh vs. conventional titanium mesh in bone regeneration: a systematic review and
Gian Maria Ragucci1, Antonio Fernández Augè2, Anna Tresserra Parra1
1Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, C. Josep Trueta, s/n, 08195 Sant Cugat del Vallès, Barcelona, Spain.
Customized titanium mesh (CTM) shows comparable vertical bone gain to conventional titanium mesh (TM) for vertical ridge augmentation. CTM offers superior horizontal bone gain and a trend towards fewer complications, supporting its clinical use.
Area of Science:
- Dentistry
- Regenerative Medicine
- Biomaterials Engineering
Background:
- Vertical bone defects present a significant challenge in implant dentistry.
- Conventional titanium mesh (TM) is used for guided bone regeneration but requires intraoperative adaptation, increasing surgical time and complication risks.
- Customized titanium mesh (CTM), fabricated via CAD/CAM or 3D printing, offers precise fit and potentially reduced surgical risks.
Purpose of the Study:
- To systematically review and meta-analyze studies comparing customized titanium mesh (CTM) and conventional titanium mesh (TM).
- To evaluate differences in bone gain (vertical and horizontal) and complication rates in vertical ridge augmentation procedures.
Main Methods:
- A systematic search of four electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Central, Web of Science, Google Scholar) was conducted up to January 2025.
- Eligible studies compared CTM and TM for vertical ridge augmentation, requiring at least 10 patients and a 6-month follow-up.
- Primary outcomes included vertical and horizontal bone gain and membrane exposure; meta-analyses and meta-regressions were performed.
Main Results:
- Twenty-two studies (608 patients, 1,318 implants) were analyzed.
- No significant difference in vertical bone gain between TM (6.24 mm) and CTM (5.14 mm) was found (P=0.628).
- CTM demonstrated significantly greater horizontal bone gain (6.38 mm vs. 3.85 mm; P=0.004) and a lower rate of membrane exposure (20.3% vs. 30.9%), though not statistically significant (P=0.721).
Conclusions:
- Customized titanium mesh (CTM) provides comparable vertical bone gain to conventional titanium mesh (TM).
- CTM offers superior horizontal bone gain and a tendency for reduced complications, suggesting potential clinical advantages.
- Further randomized trials with standardized protocols and long-term follow-up are recommended to validate these findings.
More Related Videos
09:35Distinctive Capillary Action by Micro-channels in Bone-like Templates can Enhance Recruitment of Cells for Restoration of Large Bony Defect
Published on: September 11, 2015
08:41Calvarial Model of Bone Augmentation in Rabbit for Assessment of Bone Growth and Neovascularization in Bone Substitution Materials
Published on: August 13, 2019