USE OF GRAFTS IN BONE RECONSTRUCTIONS IN IMPLANT DENTISTRY - NARRATIVE REVIEW
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63330/aurumpub.061-018Keywords:
Bone Tissue, Osseointegration, Grafts, Dental ImplantsAbstract
Dental implant rehabilitation in atrophic ridges requires a careful selection of biomaterials for horizontal and vertical bone reconstructions, given the wide variety of autogenous, allogeneic, and xenogeneic grafts available in Dentistry. This narrative literature review aimed to analyze the use of grafts in bone reconstructions in implant dentistry, addressing clinical indications, dimensional gains, and complications of reconstructive strategies. Conducted under the Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles (SANRA) guidelines, the literature search was performed in the PubMed/Medline database using the descriptors "bone grafts" and "implantology", alongside related terms, with no language or time restrictions. The combined analysis of scientific evidence demonstrates that bone reconstructions in implant dentistry, regardless of the graft's origin, are highly effective and ensure long-term implant success. However, processed bone substitutes (allogeneic and xenogeneic) stand out for offering dimensional gains equivalent or superior to autogenous bone, with greater volumetric stability and lower resorption. Additionally, by eliminating the need for a donor site, biomaterials drastically reduce surgical time and postoperative complications, making the treatment faster, safer, and more comfortable for the patient. In conclusion, scientific data highlight a paradigm shift in implant dentistry. Although autogenous bone remains the biological gold standard, allogeneic and xenogeneic substitutes are well-established in modern practice due to their high predictability, volumetric stability, and long-term success. Thus, the use of biomaterials optimizes outcomes and humanizes treatment by eliminating the donor site, resulting in a faster, safer, and more comfortable procedure for the patient.
Downloads
References
1. GUILLAUME, B. Dental implants: A review. Morphologie: bulletin de l’Association des anatomistes, v. 100, n. 331, p. 189–198, 2016.
2. HARTLEV, Jens et al. A clinical and radiographic study of implants placed in autogenous bone grafts covered by either a platelet-rich fibrin membrane or deproteinised bovine bone mineral and a collagen membrane: a pilot randomised controlled clinical trial with a 2-year follow-up. International Journal of Implant Dentistry, v. 7, n. 1, p. 8, 2021.
3. AHMET, Safak et al. Two composite bone graft substitutes for maxillary sinus floor augmentation: Histological, histomorphometric, and radiographic analyses: Histological, histomorphometric, and radiographic analyses. Implant Dentistry, v. 25, n. 3, p. 313–321, 2016.
4. WANG, Maoxia et al. Clinical and radiographic outcomes of customized allogeneic bone block versus autogenous bone block for ridge augmentation: 6 Month results of a randomized controlled clinical trial. Journal of Clinical Periodontology, v. 50, n. 1, p. 22–35, 2023.
5. MENDOZA-AZPUR, Gerardo et al. Horizontal ridge augmentation with guided bone regeneration using particulate xenogenic bone substitutes with or without autogenous block grafts: A randomized controlled trial. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, v. 21, n. 4, p. 521–530, 2019.
6. PEREIRA, Rodrigo Dos Santos et al. The new bone formation in human maxillary sinuses using two bone substitutes with different resorption types associated or not with autogenous bone graft: a comparative histomorphometric, immunohistochemical and randomized clinical study. Journal of Applied Oral Science, v. 29, p. e20200568, 2020.
7. KIM, Na-Hyun et al. Customized three-dimensional printed ceramic bone grafts for osseous defects: a prospective randomized study. Scientific Reports, v. 14, n. 1, p. 3397, 2024.
8. SOLAKOĞLU, Önder et al. A 3-year prospective randomized clinical trial of alveolar bone crest response and clinical parameters through 1, 2, and 3 years of clinical function of implants placed 4 months after alveolar ridge preservation using two different allogeneic bone-grafting materials. International Journal of Implant Dentistry, v. 8, n. 1, p. 5, 2022.
9. BASMA, Hussein S. et al. The effect of bone particle size on the histomorphometric and clinical outcomes following lateral ridge augmentation procedures: A randomized double-blinded controlled trial. Journal of Periodontology, v. 94, n. 2, p. 163–173, 2023.
10. PITOL-PALIN, Letícia et al. Performance of polydioxanone-based membrane in association with 3D-printed bioceramic scaffolds in bone regeneration. Polymers, v. 15, n. 1, p. 31, 2022.
11. CHA, Hyun-Suk et al. Frequency of bone graft in implant surgery. Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, v. 38, n. 1, p. 19, 2016.
12. DUARTE, Nathália Dantas et al. Biomaterials for guided tissue regeneration and guided bone regeneration: A review. Dentistry Journal, v. 13, n. 4, p. 179, 2025.
13. FRIGÉRIO, Paula Buzo et al. Evaluation of bone repair using a new biphasic synthetic bioceramic (Plenum® Osshp) in critical calvaria defect in rats. Biology, v. 12, n. 11, p. 1417, 2023.
14. ZHAO, Rusin et al. Bone grafts and substitutes in dentistry: A review of current trends and developments. Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), v. 26, n. 10, p. 3007, 2021.
15. FRIGÉRIO, Paula Buzo et al. Combination of a synthetic bioceramic associated with a polydioxanone-based membrane as an alternative to autogenous bone grafting. Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland), v. 9, n. 5, p. 284, 2024.
16. HAUGEN, Håvard Jostein et al. Bone grafts: which is the ideal biomaterial? Journal of Clinical Periodontology, v. 46 Suppl 21, p. 92–102, 2019.
17. WYCHOWANSKI, Piotr et al. Preliminary Clinical Data and the Comparison of the Safety and Efficacy of Autogenous Bone Grafts Versus Xenograft Implantations in Vertical Bone Deficiencies Before Dental Implant Installation. Transplantation Proceedings, v. 52, p. 2248-2251, 2020.
18. PATIL, Ruchita T et al. Evaluation of effectiveness of nanocrystalline hidroxyapatite and demineralized bone matrix combined with titanium-platelet rich fibrin for ridge preservation: a randomized controlled clinical trial. The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice, v. 25, n. 11, November 2024.
19. AHMET, Safak et al. Two Composite Bone Graft Substitutes for Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation: Histological, Histomorphometric, and Radiographic Analyses. The Journal of Oral Implantology / Implant Dentistry, v. 25, n. 3, June 2016.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
