Lina Elnakka, Janina Golob Deeb, Caroline K Carrico, Aniket Jadhav, Anusha Vaddi, George R Deeb
{"title":"Radiographic Analysis of Ridge Augmentations Using Titanium Mesh and Titanium-Reinforced Polytetrafluoroethylene Membranes.","authors":"Lina Elnakka, Janina Golob Deeb, Caroline K Carrico, Aniket Jadhav, Anusha Vaddi, George R Deeb","doi":"10.1563/aaid-joi-D-24-00155","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Titanium-reinforced polytetrafluoroethylene (Ti-PTFE) and titanium mesh (Ti-mesh) are used to augment atrophic alveolar ridges to facilitate the placement of dental implants. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the average vertical and horizontal bone gain and outcomes between Ti-PTFE and Ti-mesh techniques. To assess outcomes, retrospective chart review and superimposition of preoperative and postoperative cone beam computerized tomography scans were used. The vertical component of the augmented site (L1) was assessed along a vertical bisecting line. Horizontal width was measured in buccolingual dimension at 3-mm intervals (W1-6) along the L1. Paired t tests were used to compare bone measurements at each location, and analysis of covariance models were used to compare the grafting methods. Successes were compared with chi-squared tests. Forty-eight ridge augmentation cases with 70 sites were included: 25 Ti-PTFE with 35 sites and 23 Ti-mesh with 35 sites. The average gain in length (L1) was statistically significant for Ti-PTFE, 0.75 mm, and nonstatistically significant for Ti-mesh, 0.61 mm. The average increase in width for Ti-PTFE was 2.05 mm, whereas for Ti-mesh, it was 2.42 mm. After adjusting for preoperative bone levels, Ti-PTFE had significantly greater gains at W1 than Ti-mesh. Seventy-six percent of the cases were considered successes with 74% for Ti-PTFE and 77% for Ti-mesh with no statistically significant difference. Both ridge augmentation techniques resulted in reliable horizontal bone gains, whereas a wide range of outcomes was observed for vertical bone gains.</p>","PeriodicalId":519890,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of oral implantology","volume":" ","pages":"337-345"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of oral implantology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-D-24-00155","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Titanium-reinforced polytetrafluoroethylene (Ti-PTFE) and titanium mesh (Ti-mesh) are used to augment atrophic alveolar ridges to facilitate the placement of dental implants. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the average vertical and horizontal bone gain and outcomes between Ti-PTFE and Ti-mesh techniques. To assess outcomes, retrospective chart review and superimposition of preoperative and postoperative cone beam computerized tomography scans were used. The vertical component of the augmented site (L1) was assessed along a vertical bisecting line. Horizontal width was measured in buccolingual dimension at 3-mm intervals (W1-6) along the L1. Paired t tests were used to compare bone measurements at each location, and analysis of covariance models were used to compare the grafting methods. Successes were compared with chi-squared tests. Forty-eight ridge augmentation cases with 70 sites were included: 25 Ti-PTFE with 35 sites and 23 Ti-mesh with 35 sites. The average gain in length (L1) was statistically significant for Ti-PTFE, 0.75 mm, and nonstatistically significant for Ti-mesh, 0.61 mm. The average increase in width for Ti-PTFE was 2.05 mm, whereas for Ti-mesh, it was 2.42 mm. After adjusting for preoperative bone levels, Ti-PTFE had significantly greater gains at W1 than Ti-mesh. Seventy-six percent of the cases were considered successes with 74% for Ti-PTFE and 77% for Ti-mesh with no statistically significant difference. Both ridge augmentation techniques resulted in reliable horizontal bone gains, whereas a wide range of outcomes was observed for vertical bone gains.