Supplementary Table 3.
Quantitative evaluation of the included studies
| Biomaterials | Treatment success and failures | Posttreatment evaluation method | Vertical bone augmentation | Bone loss after treatment | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anorganic bovine bone and autogenous bone (30:70), micro-mesh as the GBR membrane | One of the implants become exposed and was removed, all of the implants were retained after 2 years (100% survival rate and 91.3% success rate) | Clinical examination and CT at baseline and 8 to 9 months after the bone grafting, clinical examinations and PA radiographs at every 6 months till 2 years after the prosthetic loading | Mean vertical bone augmentation equals to 3.71 mm (SD=1.24 mm) | Mean bone resorption around the implants equals to 1.37 mm (SD=0.32 mm), 3 implants showed bone resorption >2 mm | Pieri et al., 2008 |
| Autogenous demineralized dentin matrix (AutoBT), Bio-Oss | No infection or wound dehiscence, ISQ of AutoBT-grafted sites equals to 72.80 (SD=10.81), ISQ of Bio-Oss-grafted sites equals to 70.0 (SD=12.86) | Clinical probing through resin template from graft placement till 6 months postoperative, CT and histomorphometric analysis 6 months after the bone grafting, panoramic radiography after implant placement | 5.38 mm in AutoBT (SD=2.65 mm), 6.56 in Bio-Oss (SD=3.54 mm) at 6 months postextraction | Not mentioned | Pang et al., 2016 |
| BMMNCs (autologous cell source) andOSferion (ß-TCP) granules | No adverse tissue reaction, infection or delayed healing, good peri-implant health within 12 months after bone graft | Panoramic radiography at 1 and 12 monthsafter operation | 15.3 mm mean bone augmentationat 12 months | Not mentioned, all patients maintained good peri-implant health and oral hygiene | Bulgin and Hodzic, 2015 |
| Collagen sponge, high-density d-PTFE membrane | No signs of infection, preserved keratinized tissue, no implant complications | CBCT at 12 months after the bone grafting, clinical examination, histologic analysis, and CT at 12 months after implant placement | The overall mean percentage of newly formed bone equals to 49.3% (SD=4.7%) | No implant was placed | Aimetti, et al., 2017 |
| Corticocancelous porcine-derived bone and d-PTFE membrane (without autogenous bone) | Uneventfully healing with no clinical signs of soft-tissue inflammation, no recession, and no membrane exposure, complete maintenance of peri-implant without any signs of bone resorption | Biopsy and histomorphometric analysis (optical microscope) at 9 months after the bone grafting, follow-up PA radiographs at 1, 12, and 24 months after prosthesis delivery (15 days after implant abutment surgery) | Adequate bone for implant placement and to support the functional loading of the implant | Complete maintenance of bone level and no signs of bone resorption in all of the follow-ups | Cucchi and Ghensi, 2014 |
| Deproteinized bovine bone and free gingival graft | Successful implant placement and favorablesoft tissue preservation | Radiographic evaluation on Tc scans and PA radiographs3 months after the bone grafting, clinical examination of implantat 6 months after implant placement | Adequate bone volume in height and in width, allowing an implant placement | Notmentioned | Cechetti et al., 2014 |
| Flexible cortical equine bone sheet (without GBR membrane) | All of the implant abutments were judged to be successful throughout the study (Albrektsson and Zarb criteria) | Panoramic radiography and clinical evaluation after implant placement at 1 week, 1 month, 6 months and then yearly for at least 3 years | Adequate bone volume to reconstruct the correct ridge profile and to ensure successful implant outcomes | Not mentioned, stable PD at all of the follow-ups (2-3 mm) | Ludovichetti et al., 2011 |
| Iliac crest bonevs. bovine anorganic bone | Two implants could not be placed in one patient at the autogenous bone group (graft failure),1 implant in the Bio-Oss group failed after loading, after implant loading, one peri-implantitis occurred at the autogenous bone group | Clinical and radiographic examination at 3 and 6 weeks and 3 months after the bone grafting, biopsy and histological analysis at 4 months after the bone grafting, PA radiographs at the implant placement time, and at 1 year after that | 31.2% in autogenous bone (SD=6.9%), 27.3% in Bio-Oss (SD=7%), at 4 months after the bone grafting | 0.82 mm peri-implant marginal bone loss in autogenous bone (SD=0.59), 0.59 mm peri-implant marginal bone loss in Bio-Oss (SD=0.4) | Felice et al., 2009 |
| PerioGlas® (Bioactive glass) and autogenous bone | All of the implant abutments were reliable and lasting throughout the study | Panoramic radiography immediate postoperative, and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after bone graft, a biopsy at 6 months after the bone grafting and then histomorphometric analysis and SEM microscopy, clinical examination of implant abutments at follow-up sessions | Adequate bone volume tosupport the implants placement | Maintained bone volume during all of the follow-ups | Gatti, et al., 2014 |
| Xenogenous bone block (Bio-Oss) onlay graft | No inflammation, no implant complications | Clinical examination and panoramic radiographs at 1 day, 1 month, and 6 months after the bone grafting, bone tissue segments harvested and histological analysis at 9 months after the bone graft, CTs at 6 months after the bone grafting, PA radiographs at 12 months after placing the final prosthesis | The level of bone augmentation was measured in height ranged from 4.1 to 6.0 mm | 0.5 mm peri-implant marginal bone loss (SD=1.00 mm) | Li et al. 2013 |
| Xenograft material and bone fragments from traumatic site, resorbable collagen membrane or titanium mesh as the GBR membrane | Successful placement of all the implant abutments, and progressed through the follow-up periods without complications | Cases 1, 2, and 3: CBCT at 6 months after the bone grafting; Cases 1 and 2: panoramic radiograph and clinical examination at 4 and 1 year (s) after implant placement, respectively | Adequate bone volume for implant placement | No specific bone resorption during all of the follow-ups | Kim and Leem, 2014 |
CT: Computed tomography, PA: Posteroanterior, PD: Progressive disease, SD: Standard deviations, GBR: Guided bone regeneration, CBCT: Cone-beam computed tomography, ISQ: Implant stability quotient