Comparative Bone Graft Evaluation for Dental Implant Success: An Evidence-Based Review.

In this review, we provide a comparative evaluation of different bone grafts for dental implants success. We performed a literature review to analyze dental implant success and survival rates after the use of various grafts for bone augmentation. A total of 41 studies were selected and analyzed based on parameters including study design, number of implants placed, total number of participants, type of graft used, site from which graft was obtained, time elapsed between bone augmentation and implant placement, implant survival, and success rates. Results indicate that after a follow-up period of 1-5 yr, respective success and survival rates are as follows: block grafts, 91.5% and 75%; blood derivatives, 91.5% and 96.7%; composite grafts, 80.9% and 94.2%; xenografts and particulate grafts, 100% for both success and survival. After evaluating the available studies, we can report that autologous block grafts, composite grafts, and blood derivatives were the most commonly used grafting materials for bone augmentation before placing dental implants. Xenografts and particulate grafts had 100% success and survival rates, but more studies are needed to assess the impact of these grafting materials.

Failure rates of mini-implants inserted in the retromolar area.

OBJECTIVE: Anchorage reinforcement is an important issue in orthodontic treatment. There is a lack of evidence regarding the failure rate of mini-implants inserted in the retromolar (RM) area, therefore the purpose of this present study was to evaluate the failure rates of mini-implants inserted in the RM area and to evaluate the factors affecting their stability. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study of 102 patients (52 female, 55 male; mean age: 18.6years; SD: 5.2years) that had received 110 RM mini-implants for orthodontic treatment from 1.2.2012 to 1.6.2017 was conducted after IRB approval at the department of orthodontics. Clinical notes and photographic images of the patients were analysed to evaluate the dependent and independent variables. The primary outcome was mini-implant failure. Independent variables of patient related factors, mini-implant related factors, orthodontic related factors, surgical related factors, and maintenance-related factors were evaluated by logistic regression models for association to failure rates. RESULTS: A 23.2% failure rate of mini-implants inserted in the RM area was observed. The patient's right side and inflammation were significantly associated with RM mini-implant failure. The odds ratios (relative risk) for mini-implant failure in the right side, and in mini-implants with inflammation around them were 0.166 and 0.188, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Failure rate for RM mini-implants were found to be 23.2%. To minimize RM mini-implant failure, clinicians should attempt to reduce inflammation around the mini-implants, especially for mini-implants placed on the right RM area.