Premium
Clinical Similarities and Histological Diversity Comparing Fresh Frozen Onlay Bone Blocks Allografts and Autografts in Human Maxillary Reconstruction
Author(s) -
SpinNeto Rubens,
Landazuri Del Barrio Ricardo Andrés,
Pereira Luis Antonio Violin Dias,
Marcantonio Rosemary Adriana Chiérici,
Marcantonio Elcio,
Marcantonio Jr Elcio
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
clinical implant dentistry and related research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.338
H-Index - 85
eISSN - 1708-8208
pISSN - 1523-0899
DOI - 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2011.00382.x
Subject(s) - medicine , trephine , bone grafting , dentistry , bone remodeling , biopsy , tissue bank , surgery , transplantation , pathology
Background: In the absence of autologous bone for harvesting, fresh‐frozen bone allografts turned into an alternative for bone reconstruction procedures. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to make a histological analysis of fresh‐frozen onlay bone allografts (ALs), compared with autografts, in patients who needed maxillary reconstruction prior to dental implants placement. Materials and Methods: Twelve patients with bone deficiencies (width inferior to 4 mm) in the sites where the implants were planned were enrolled in the study. From these, six were elected to be treated with autogenous (AT) bone grafts and six with fresh‐frozen bone AL. This last group included the patients who had absence of a convenient amount of bone in donor sites. Each patient received from one to six graft blocks, totalling to 12 ATs and 17 ALs. Seven months after grafting procedures, biopsies of the grafts were made using 2‐mm internal diameter trephine burs, and processed for histological analysis. One biopsy was retrieved from each patient. Results: Clinically, all grafts were found to be firm in consistency and well‐incorporated to the receptor bed. Histological analysis showed a large amount of necrotic bone surrounded by few spots of new‐formed bone in the AL group, suggesting low rate of graft remodeling. In the AT group, an advanced stage of bone remodeling was seen. Conclusions: Human fresh‐frozen bone block AL showed clinical compatibility for grafting procedures, although associated to slow remodeling process. Further studies are needed to define, at long term, the remodeling process chronology the clinical longitudinal results for fresh‐frozen bone AL.