Background/Objectives: The aim of this retrospective study was to radiographically evaluate the endo-sinus bone gain (ESBG) following osseodensification procedures using CBCT and compare the results to more conventional sinus lifting techniques. Methods: A total of 72 patients underwent crestal sinus floor elevation procedures and were provided with 102 implants with a sand-blasted and acid-etched surface with microthreads (Medentika^® Microcone Implants, Hugelsheim, Germany). Patients were divided into two groups; the osseodensification group (OD; n = 36) and the osseodensified augmentation group (ODA; n = 36). Results: The mean residual bone height (RBH) was 5.71 (1.77) and 4.30 (0.94) mm in the OD and ODA groups, respectively. An ESBG of 3.45 (1.18) and 5.74 (1.31) mm was observed in the OD and ODA groups, respectively, and as compared to the baseline RBH, the ESBG was statistically significant in both groups after 6 months (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Within the limits of this retrospective study, crestal sinus lifting with the osseodensification technique seems to be a fast, effective, and safe method. Longer follow-up studies with full intrasinus bone topography and structure analyses are needed to prove the success rate of endo-sinus bone gain.

(1) Background: Bone Lamina Technique and Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR) are commonly used for horizontally-deficient maxillary ridge reconstruction, although more detailed evaluation to assess the differences between such techniques is necessitated. (2) Methods: In this retrospective study, patients having a horizontal bone width of ≤4 mm in the maxilla, who were treated with Cortical Strut (CS), were collected to represent the “test group”, and those treated with GBR with no CS involvement represented the “control group”. A 1:1 mixture of autogenous bone (AB) and anorganic bovine bone (ABB) with resorbable collagen membrane was applied to both groups. Volumetric changes between groups were measured with cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). The primary outcome represented volumetric graft resorption rate whilst the secondary outcomes represented any probable complications and implant insertion torque. (3) Results: A total of 36 patients were included in this study (36 grafted sites; 18 for CS group and 18 for GBR group). Mean bone graft volume reduction in the CS and GBR groups was 8.26 ± 1.60% and 14.36 ± 3.55%, respectively. The GBR group showed significantly more bone resorption than the CS group (p < 0.001). Complications and insertion torque were similar between the groups (p > 0.05). (4) Conclusions: Both CS and GBR techniques for hard-tissue augmentation provided sufficient bone graft mass volume for implant insertion, whereas CS demonstrated lower resorption rate at maxillary augmented sites, compared to GBR.

Background/Objectives: Various bone substitutes have been recommended to augment the horizontal gap following immediate implantation. The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of an autogenous mineralized dentin graft or a deproteinized bovine bone in horizontal gap augmentation following immediate implant placement in the maxillary anterior region. Methods: A total of 110 patients underwent tooth extraction followed by immediate implant placement. The patients were divided into two groups. The first group received an autogenous mineralized dentin graft (the test group) while the second group received a deproteinized bovine bone (the control group) to augment the horizontal gap. Preoperative (T0), immediate postoperative (T1), and 1-year postoperative (T2) cone beam computed tomography scans were taken from all the patients. Linear measurements were recorded 1 mm (R1) and 5 mm (R2) points apical to the implant platform at both T1 and T2 time intervals. Pink Esthetic Scores and prosthetic complications were evaluated as well. Results: There were 57 patients with a mean age of 45.42 ± 9.86 (range 24–63 years) selected as the test group and 53 patients with a mean age of 40.28 ± 11.69 (range 20–63 years) as the control group. The mean reduction in the buccal bone plate at R1 was 6.39 ± 3.78% in the test group and 6.99 ± 5.01% in the control group (p > 0.05). The mean reduction in the buccal bone plate at R2 was 5.46 ± 4.98% in the test group and 6.77 ± 7.60% in the control group (p < 0.05). The PES and prosthetic-related complications were shown to be negligible between the groups (p > 0.05). Conclusions: The efficiency of using an autogenous mineralized dentin graft for horizontal gap augmentation showed similar results in comparison to using a deproteinized bovine bone in relation to buccolingual socket reduction following immediate implantation.