الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 141 |  |  |
| | | from | 141 | | |
Abstract
Background: Vertical ridge augmentation is a fairly common procedure made prior to or in conjugation with implant placement. Over time, authors have suggested a wide variety of strategies for guided bone regeneration. Tent screw technique offers an ideal solution for severe vertical ridge defects as tenting screws have provided sufficient support and space maintainance for successful bone regeneration. Purpose: The aim of the study was to compare clinically and radiographically between tenting screws and conventional fixation screws that used for vertical augmentation of posterior mandibular ridge, in combination with resorbable collagen membranes and mixture of autografts and xenografts. Patients and Methods: Patients with missing lower posterior teeth (sixteen teeth to be replaced) accompanied by large vertical alveolar ridge resorption were selected for vertical ridge augmentation with age range 20-40 and divided randomly into two equal groups. group I: patients have undergone guided bone regeneration using conventional fixation screws in combination with resorbable collagen membranes and mixture of autografts and xenografts and, group II: patients have undergone guided bone regeneration using tenting screws in combination with resorbable collagen membranes and mixture of autografts and xenografts. All patients were followed up clinically and radiographically for 6 months. Clinical evaluation of postoperative pain, facial edema and wound healing on the 1st, 3rd, and 7th days after surgery were done. Radiographic evaluation using cone-beam computed tomography immediately postoperative and after 6 months follow up period were done and statistical analysis were applied. Results: Clinically, there was insignificant difference among two groups in terms of postoperative pain, facial edema and wound healing. Radiographically, there was a statistically significantly higher bone gain and lower graft resorption in tenting vs. conventional group according to bone height. Regarding to relative bone gain for both groups, there was no significant difference in the amount of bone gain after 6 months. However, there was a statistically significantly lower amount of graft resorption in tenting vs. conventional group. Also, there was no statistically significant difference when comparing 6-months bone density between the two groups adjusted with immediate reading as a covariate. Conclusions: Based on the results obtained from this study with respect to its limitations, tenting screw technology is a reliable technique for vertical ridge augmentation compared to the traditional guided bone regeneration (GBR) technique by providing mechanical support to the membrane as well as increasing the stability of the graft particles below.