LOGIN
 
Share Page:
Back

Volume 22 , Issue 2
March/April 2007

Pages 280288


Augmentation of the Posterior Atrophic Edentulous Maxilla with Implants Placed in the Ulna: A Prospective Single-Blind Controlled Clinical Trial

Gioacchino Cannizzaro, MD, DDS / Michele Leone, MD, DDS / Ugo Consolo, MD / Vittorio Ferri, MD, DDS / Giorgio Licitra, MD / Helen Worthington, PhD, Cstat / Marco Esposito, DDS, PhD


PMID: 17465354

Purpose: To evaluate a new method to treat the posterior atrophic edentulous maxilla: dental implants placed in the ulna and transplanted with their surrounding bone blocks as inlays into the sinus. Conventional sinus augmentation with particulated autogenous bone grafts served as a control procedure. Materials and Methods: Fifty-two implants were placed in the ulnas of 20 patients. After 6 weeks, bone blocks containing 1 to 3 implants were harvested and transplanted into the sinuses protruding 3 to 4 mm. Implants were left to heal for 6 weeks. Twenty patients with similar treatment indications treated with particulated bone grafts from the mental symphysis, tibia, or iliac crest acted as controls. Grafts were allowed to heal for 6 months in the control group. Fifty-two control-group implants were allowed to heal for 4 months. The main outcome measures were prosthetic and implant success. Stability of individual implants was assessed with Osstell and Periotest at baseline and after 6 and 12 months of loading. Independent sample chi-square tests, t tests, and paired t tests were used with a significance level of .05. Results: No patient dropped out or withdrew; no prosthesis or implant failed. No major surgical complications were occurred. There were no differences between the 2 groups at any time point in implant stability. Both modalities resulted in a significant increase of implant stability at 6 and 12 months. The mean change (SD) from baseline to 1 year in Periotest measurements was 1.44 (0.48) in the test and 1.29 (0.58) in the control (paired t tests; P < .001). For the Osstell, these values were 5.88 (4.18) and 5.48 (3.93) for the test and control groups, respectively (paired t tests: P < .001). Conclusions: Ulna implant block grafting represents an alternative to conventional sinus augmentation, particularly when vertical augmentation is desirable or large iliac crest grafts are needed. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007;22:280288

Key words: bone grafting, dental implants, sinus augmentation, ulna


Full Text PDF File | Order Article

 

 
Get Adobe Reader
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF files. This is a free program available from the Adobe web site.
Follow the download directions on the Adobe web site to get your copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.

 

© 2014 Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc JOMI Home
Current Issue
Ahead of Print
Archive
Author Guidelines
About
Accepted Manuscripts
Submission Form
Submit
Reprints
Permission
Advertising
Quintessence Home
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
About Us
Contact Us
Help