Xenograft VS Xeno+Allogenic grafts using the tentpoled implant technique for reconstruction of horizontal ridge deficiencies: a randomized clinical trial | ||||
| Egyptian Dental Journal | ||||
| Volume 71, Issue 3 - Serial Number 2, July 2025, Page 2061-2070 PDF (3.9 MB) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/edj.2025.373686.3441 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Sameh Ahmed Seif 1; Aalaa Emara  2
| ||||
| 1Associate Professor, OMFS, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University. EGYPT. Associate Professor,Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery Dept, College of Dentistry , King Saud University. Saudi Arabia | ||||
| 2Associate Professor, OMFS, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University. EGYPT | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Dental implants are the gold standard for treatment of edentulous spaces especially with the introduction of the tent-poling technique. This study aims to compare the use of xenografts VS xeno-allogenic grafts with tenting screws for reconstruction of horizontally deficient ridges. Methodology: 19 patients were included in the study with 30 different implant site randomly assigned to the study (receiving a combination of xeno-allogenic bone graft) or the control group (receiving xenografts) for the defective alveolar ridge. The 1st stage surgery included the placement of 1.5 mm self drilling tenting screws perpendicular to the outer cortical plate. The 2nd stage surgery was 6-9 months later during which the tenting screw was removed and the osteotomy site prepared. CBCTs were ordered preoperatively, 6 months postoperatively and after implant placement. Histomorphometric assessment was carried out for the core biopsy retrieved. Results: One case (excluded from the study) showed partial wound dehiscence with severe graft loss & required a second grafting procedure. In 2 of the cases complete screw-head coverage by bone was noted on the 2nd surgery. Histomorphometric assessment showed 43% mean bone content in the study group while it was only 33% in the control group postoperatively. 81% of the former and 72% of the latter was vital bone. Radiographically, statistically-significant bone gain was noted within each group but was statistically insignificant between the groups. Conclusions: Within the limitations of the study, it can be concluded that the type of bonegraft has no significant impact on bone gain with the tentpoling technique. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Tentpoling; Xenograft; Allograft; horizontal alveolar ridge defect; dental implant | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 72 PDF Download: 45 |
||||
