Poor aesthetics measured by dentist (3 years) · Patients receiving immediate single implants in fresh extraction sockets (maxillary anterior/premolar sites)
Bio-Oss (anorganic bovine bone) led to lower poor aesthetics measured by dentist (3 years) compared with bio-Oss + resorbable barrier; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
After 3 years of loading, the operator judged aesthetics to be poor in 2/7 patients of the Bio-Oss group and in 2/5 of the Bio-Oss plus barrier group; no statistically significant difference.
1 study · 20 participants
GRADE not reported
Severe pain for > 1 week · Patients with atrophic (resorbed) mandibles needing implants
Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer… led to higher severe pain for > 1 week compared with short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Augmentation procedure (partial) failure · Patients with vertically deficient posterior/anterior mandibular ridges needing implants
Vertical distraction osteogenesis showed no clear difference in augmentation procedure (partial) failure compared with autogenous onlay bone graft (mandibular ramus); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Experienced the operation negatively · Patients with atrophic (resorbed) mandibles needing implants
Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer… showed no clear difference in experienced the operation negatively compared with short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Marginal bone level change · Patients with vertically deficient posterior/anterior mandibular ridges needing implants
Vertical distraction osteogenesis showed no clear difference in 1-year post-loading bone level changes compared with autogenous onlay bone graft (mandibular ramus); GRADE not reported.
2 findings from 1 review
Complication at augmented site · Patients with vertically deficient posterior/anterior mandibular ridges needing implants
Vertical GBR with non-resorbable titanium-reinforced barriers showed no clear difference in complication at augmented site compared with vertical GBR with resorbable barriers supported by osteosynthesis…; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
No improvement of facial appearance (3 weeks) · Patients with atrophic (resorbed) mandibles needing implants
Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer… led to lower no improvement of facial appearance (3 weeks) compared with short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Prosthetic failure (2 years) · Patients with atrophic (resorbed) mandibles needing implants
Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer… showed no clear difference in prosthetic failure compared with short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Distraction distance (bone gain, mm) · Patients with vertically deficient posterior/anterior mandibular ridges needing implants
Ultrasound during vertical distraction osteogenesis showed no clear difference in distraction distance (bone gain, mm) compared with placebo (no ultrasound) during vertical distraction; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Vertical bone gain · Patients with vertically deficient posterior/anterior mandibular ridges needing implants
Vertical distraction osteogenesis led to higher vertical bone gain compared with autogenous inlay bone graft (iliac crest); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Augmentation procedure failure · Patients with vertically deficient posterior/anterior mandibular ridges needing implants
Vertical GBR with non-resorbable titanium-reinforced barriers showed no clear difference in augmentation procedure failure compared with vertical GBR with resorbable barriers supported by osteosynthesis…; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Major complications · Patients with atrophic (resorbed) mandibles needing implants
Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer… led to higher major complications compared with short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Perimplant bone loss · Patients with vertically deficient posterior/anterior mandibular ridges needing implants
Vertical GBR with non-resorbable titanium-reinforced barriers showed no clear difference in perimplant bone loss (3 years) compared with vertical GBR with resorbable barriers supported by osteosynthesis…; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Vertical bone gain · Patients with vertically deficient posterior/anterior mandibular ridges needing implants
Vertical GBR with non-resorbable titanium-reinforced barriers showed no clear difference in vertical bone gain compared with vertical GBR with resorbable barriers supported by osteosynthesis…; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Complications · Patients with vertically deficient posterior/anterior mandibular ridges needing implants
Vertical distraction osteogenesis showed no clear difference in complications compared with autogenous inlay bone graft (iliac crest); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Implant failure · Patients with atrophic (resorbed) mandibles needing implants
Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer… showed no clear difference in implant failure compared with short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Vertical bone gain · Patients with vertically deficient posterior/anterior mandibular ridges needing implants
Vertical distraction osteogenesis showed no clear difference in vertical bone gain compared with autogenous onlay bone graft (mandibular ramus); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Complication at augmentation + donor site · Patients with vertically deficient posterior/anterior mandibular ridges needing implants
Vertical distraction osteogenesis showed no clear difference in complication at augmented + donor site compared with autogenous onlay bone graft (mandibular ramus); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Vertical bone gain · Patients with vertically deficient posterior/anterior mandibular ridges needing implants
Vertical GBR with autogenous bone (retromolar) led to higher vertical bone gain compared with vertical GBR with bone substitute (Regenaform); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
MD 0.6 [0.21, 0.99]
1 study · 5 participants
GRADE not reported
Complication at augmentation + donor site · Patients with vertically deficient posterior/anterior mandibular ridges needing implants
Vertical distraction osteogenesis showed no clear difference in complication at augmentation + donor site compared with vertical GBR with non-resorbable barriers + particulate autogenous…; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review