Skip to main content

Table 4 Assessment parameters and study results

From: Horizontal augmentation techniques in the mandible: a systematic review

Author Assessment method Initial horizontal width in mm Final horizontal width in mm Horizontal gain in mm Loss in mm Bone formation in % bone graft failure in % Implant survival in % at last follow-up
Amorfini et al. [101] Clinical assessment; CBCT scan 5.7 0.2 0 100
Barbu et al. [100] Clinical assessment, CBCT scan 3.5 8.7 5.2    4.2 100
Beitlitum et al. [117] Clinical assessment, CBCT scan 5.8 ± 0.6 10.0 ± 1.4 4.2 ± 0.9   0 100/24 mo
Di Stefano et al. [104] Clinical assessment, CT scan, OPG, histology, immunohistochemistry 3.9 ± 0.1 7.1 ± 0.2 3.2   35 0 100
Nissan et al. [103] Clinical assessment; CBCT scan; OPG 5.6 ± 1.0 0.2 ± 0.2 20.7 95.3/37 mo
Schwartz-Arad et al. [99] Clinical assessment; OPG, CT scan 3.6 98.5/12 mo
92.5/36 mo
77.5/48 mo
Silva et al. [105] Clinical, histology, microtomographic morphometry 4.6 ± 1.3 0.6 31.8 0 96/31.8 mo
Urban et al. [102] Clinical assessment; periapical radiographs histomorphometry in 9 sites 1.9 7.2 5.3 1.1 31 6.3 100
  1. Complications %: number of patients complication rate in the augmented sites occurring during the observation period; implant survival %: survival rate of implants in the augmented area in percent; horizontal gain (mm): horizontal augmentation result at the end of the observation period in millimeters; horizontal width (mm): horizontal metrics at the end of the observation period in millimeters; loss (mm)/(%): difference between the initially augmented distance and the final result in millimeters/percent; bone formation (%): amount of newly formed bone in the defect area in percent