Journal of stomatology, oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2026
Clinical outcomes of guided bone regeneration in anterior maxilla with labial dehiscence: a retrospective cohort study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhu Danji, Fu Mengdie, Xu Wenyi, Zhang Qinmeng, Chen Yan, Zhang Jing, Jiang Zhiwei, Yang Guoli
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: For labial bone dehiscence in anterior maxilla, especially severe defects, there is no consensus on the therapy outcome of guided bone regeneration (GBR). The bone regeneration and esthetic effect are needed to explore in the labial dehiscent sites, with a classification based on the relative lengths of dehiscence and implants.
OBJECTIVES: This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of simultaneous GBR in single implant labial bone dehiscence of different levels in the anterior maxilla.
MATERIALS AND METHOD: The patients treated with single implant placement with simultaneous GBR in the anterior maxilla from 2018 to 2023 were included. A total of 106 patients with 106 implants met the inclusion criteria. According to the levels of labial dehiscence (0, < 1/3, 1/3-2/3, and > 2/3 implant length), they were allocated into 4 groups (Group Control, Small, Medium, and Large). The radiographic data, esthetics scores (PES/WES), and implant survival were collected.
RESULTS: The implant survival rates in all groups were 100%. No statistically significant differences were observed between four groups regarding bone change rates and PES/WES. Sex, age, implant site, implant system, implant diameter, and implant placement timing were relevant factors of bone changes in labial dehiscence sites (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: For different severity bone dehiscence in the anterior maxilla, no significant differences in GBR outcomes were detected, while the numerically higher change rates in large dehiscence warrant cautious interpretation.
OBJECTIVES: This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of simultaneous GBR in single implant labial bone dehiscence of different levels in the anterior maxilla.
MATERIALS AND METHOD: The patients treated with single implant placement with simultaneous GBR in the anterior maxilla from 2018 to 2023 were included. A total of 106 patients with 106 implants met the inclusion criteria. According to the levels of labial dehiscence (0, < 1/3, 1/3-2/3, and > 2/3 implant length), they were allocated into 4 groups (Group Control, Small, Medium, and Large). The radiographic data, esthetics scores (PES/WES), and implant survival were collected.
RESULTS: The implant survival rates in all groups were 100%. No statistically significant differences were observed between four groups regarding bone change rates and PES/WES. Sex, age, implant site, implant system, implant diameter, and implant placement timing were relevant factors of bone changes in labial dehiscence sites (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: For different severity bone dehiscence in the anterior maxilla, no significant differences in GBR outcomes were detected, while the numerically higher change rates in large dehiscence warrant cautious interpretation.