Quality and Success of Bone Graft from Two Different Mandibular Sites Compared for Maxillary Ridge Augmentation: A Systematic Review.

Abstract

Aim: This systematic review was undertaken to compare the quality of autogenous bone graft harvested from two different mandibular donor sites, that is, from the chin region and from posterior mandibular region for maxillary alveolar ridge augmentation and success after implant placement.

Materials and methods: Systematic searches were performed using PubMed, MEDLINE, and Cochrane electronic databases, which reported on the quality of autogenous harvested bone graft of the recipient site in maxillary alveolar ridge augmentation from a period of January 1995 to December 2020 using PRISMA guidelines. Studies were included if: They reported on bone grafts harvested from the chin and body region of the mandible. Time and nature of postoperative complications were reported. Quality comparison of autogenous bone graft from both chin and posterior mandible was done from the analysis of extracted data of all articles. The risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane risk of bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

Results: Out of the eight studies that have been included, five studies concluded that graft from the retromolar region of the mandible produced better quality bone graft compared with graft from the chin region. In contrast, two studies showed the opposite that graft from the chin is better in quality than the graft from the retromolar region. Whereas one study mentioned not being able to find any significant difference in the quality of two grafts. The implant placement also showed a maximum success rate in the retromolar region compared with the chin region in four studies whereas in one study, the success rate was better in the chin region and in three studies, no significant difference could be found in the success rate of implant placement in two different graft regions taken from two different donor sites of the mandible.

Conclusion: This systematic review demonstrates that the retromolar group has shown better results for ridge augmentation in the maxilla compared with the chin group. The retromolar group also produces better and more successful implant placement with fewer chances of failure compared with the chin group.

Clinical significance: In oral surgery, the use of dental implants for partial and complete edentulous jaw rehabilitation is standard procedure. Both hard and soft tissues must be present in adequate quantity and quality for implant dentistry to produce the best results. Patients with resorbed jaws can receive implant-supported restorations by a variety of reconstructive methods, such as tissue regeneration and the use of vascularized or nonvascularized grafts. How to cite this article: Mondal C, Mohanty R, Rana P, et al. Quality and Success of Bone Graft from Two Different Mandibular Sites Compared for Maxillary Ridge Augmentation: A Systematic Review. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024;25(7):703-710.