Lateral ridge split and immediate implant placement in moderately resorbed alveolar ridges: How much is the added width?

• Main Authors: Amin Rahpeyma, Saeedeh Khajehahmadi, Vahid Reza Hosseini
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2013-01-01
• Series: Dental Research Journal
• Subjects: Atrophic ridge; dental implant; ridge splitting
• Online Access: http://www.drjjournal.net/article.asp?issn=1735-3327;year=2013;volume=10;issue=5;spage=602;epage=608;aulast=Rahpeyma

Background: Lateral ridge split technique is a way to solve the problem of the width in narrow ridges with adequate height. Simultaneous insertion of dental implants will considerably reduce the edentulism time. Materials and Methods: Twenty-five patients who were managed with ridge splitting technique were enrolled. Thirty-eight locations in both jaws with near equal distribution in quadrants received 82 dental fixtures. Beta Tricalcium phosphate (Cerasorb® ) was used as biomaterial to fill the intercortical space. Submerged implants were used and 3 months later healing caps were placed. Direct bone measurements before and after split were done with a Collis. Patients were clinically re-evaluated at least 6 months after implant loading. All the data were analyzed by Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software version 11.5 (SPSS Inc, Chicago Illinois, USA). Frequency of edentulous spaces and pre/post operative bone width was analyzed. Paired t-test was used for statistical analysis. Difference was considered significant if P value was less than 0.05. Results: Mean value for presplit width was 3.2 ± 0.34 mm while post-split mean width was 5.57 ± 0.49 mm. Mean gain in crest ridge after ridge splitting was 2 ± 0.3 mm. Statistical analysis showed significant differences in width before and after operation ((P < 0.05). All implants (n = 82) survived and were in full function at follow up (at least 6 months after implant loading). Conclusion: Ridge splitting technique in both jaws showed the predictable outcomes, if appropriate cases selected and special attention paid to details; then the waiting time between surgery and beginning of prosthodontic treatment can be reduced to 3 month.