uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Bone substitutes and growth factors as an alternative/complement to autogenous bone for grafting in implant dentistry
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Medicinska och farmaceutiska vetenskapsområdet, centrumbildningar mm , Centre for Research and Development, Gävleborg.
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgical Sciences, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery.
2008 (English)In: Periodontology 2000, ISSN 0906-6713, Vol. 47, no 1, 172-92 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Autogenous bone, with its osteogenic, osteoinductive and osteoconductive properties, has long been considered the ideal grafting material in bone reconstructive surgery (26, 85). However, drawbacks with autogenous bone include morbidity, availability and unpredictable graft resorption (85, 93, 94, 128, 167, 174). Recent advances in biotechnology have provided the implant surgeon with access to a great variety of bone grafting materials and the possibility of easier implant treatment for the patient as well as for the surgeon. However, the perfect grafting material has yet to be identified. Current research focuses on proteins and carriers for delivering growth factors to the surgical site; however, drawbacks of high production costs and unpredictable results exist. The clinical usefulness of a great variety of materials for bone augmentation in implant dentistry has been seriously questioned (56). The use of osteconductive osteobiologics in implant dentistry remains an experimental procedure until more knowledge becomes available regarding the clinical and biologic aspects of these materials. Osteoinduction denotes a process of accelerated bone formation that provides an abbreviated healing period. Using solely an osteoconductive grafting material may prolong the healing period with 2–6 months, which may be of clinical significance. Uncontrolled case reports, which suggest a graft healing period of 3–4 months for osteoconductive deproteinized bovine bone or biphasic materials, may mislead the inexperienced dentist. Furthermore, clinical recommendations seem premature when based upon a few animal studies rather than upon comprehensive long-term investigations in humans. This review discusses clinical studies of bone substitutes, growth factors and bone graft procedures employed with the purpose of augmenting periimplant sites.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2008. Vol. 47, no 1, 172-92 p.
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-16602DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0757.2008.00251.xPubMedID: 18412581OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-16602DiVA: diva2:44373
Available from: 2008-05-29 Created: 2008-05-29Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed
By organisation
Centre for Research and Development, GävleborgOral and Maxillofacial Surgery
In the same journal
Periodontology 2000
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 327 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link