Anterior prosthetic temporization and bone regeneration: an 8-year retrospective analysis.

PURPOSE: To retrospectively assess the effect of interim prostheses on bone healing, postoperative complications, and graft success in sites undergoing bone regeneration.

MATERIAL AND

METHODS

This monocentric retrospective study included 100 patients who underwent 138 bone regeneration procedures between 2018 and 2025. Patients were divided into a control group without interim prostheses (n = 49) and a prosthesis group (n = 51). The prosthesis group was further described according to prosthesis type in exploratory subgroup analyses. Demographics, surgical, radiographic, and clinical data were collected. Bone gain, bone loss, and postoperative complications were compared using chi-square, Fisher's exact test, ANOVA, and logistic regression, as appropriate.

RESULTS

A total of 138 bone regeneration procedures were analyzed. Bone augmentation and bone loss after healing were similar in patients with and without interim prostheses (p > 0.05). Postoperative complications, including hematoma, swelling, bleeding, edema, and ecchymosis, did not differ significantly between groups. Theoretical bone gain (5.5 ± 3.2 mm vs. 6.2 ± 4.1 mm; p = 0.3), actual bone gain (4.4 ± 3.2 mm vs. 4.6 ± 3.5 mm; p = 0.7), and bone loss (1.31 ± 1.27 mm vs. 1.59 ± 1.66 mm; p = 0.3) were comparable between groups. Exploratory subgroup analyses suggested differences in theoretical bone gain according to prosthesis type (p = 0.026), but no robust difference was demonstrated for actual bone gain, bone loss, or complications.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective cohort, carefully adjusted interim prostheses did not appear to adversely affect bone healing or graft success. These findings should be interpreted cautiously because of selection bias, surgical heterogeneity, and limited subgroup sample sizes. Prospective studies are needed to confirm these observations and refine clinical recommendations.