Autogenous bone block from the chin vs Bovine-derived xenograft (Bio-Oss) plus resorbable barrier: Prosthesis/implant failure (1 year)
- Population
- Patients with horizontally resorbed maxillary sites needing single implants
- Intervention
- Autogenous bone block from the chin
- Comparison
- Bovine-derived xenograft (Bio-Oss) plus resorbable barrier
- Outcome
- Prosthesis/implant failure (1 year)
Autogenous bone block from the chin showed no clear difference in prosthesis/implant failure (1 year) compared with 100% Bio-Oss + resorbable barrier; GRADE not reported.
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Autogenous bone block from the chin vs 100% Bio-Oss + resorbable barrier Prosthesis/implant failure (1 year) · Patients with horizontally resorbed maxillary sites needing single implants · Up to 1 year post-loading Autogenous bone block from the chin showed no clear difference in prosthesis/implant failure (1 year) compared with 100% Bio-Oss + resorbable barrier; GRADE not reported. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: horizontal and vertical bone augmentation techniques for dental… (2009) · Cochrane All outcomes | OR 0.19 [0.01, 4.07] | 1 study · 62 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interventions for replacing missing teeth: horizontal and vertical bone augmentation techniques for dental implant treatment 2009 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2009-06 | Not listed | Not assessed |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Autogenous bone block from the chin vs Autogenous bone block from the chin + resorbable barrier · Patients with horizontally resorbed maxillary sites needing single implants · 0 reviews
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.