The Effect Of Ridge Splitting With Laser Bio-Stimulation On Bone Loss Around Four - Implant Supported Mandibular Overdentures (Within- Patient Study)

Purpose: This study aimed at assessing the clinical and radiographic consequences of implants supporting mandibular overdenture. Two implants located in expanded anterior–knife-edge ridges with crest ridge-splitting, bonegraft, membrane placement followed by laser application. The anterior implants were compared toposterior ones implanted in unexpanded ridges with no modifications. Materials and Methods: Twenty completely-edentate patients hadanterior-knife-edge mandibles, two implants were received in the 1st premolar areas without ridge-expansion or further alterations (Group I; control group). Another two implants (lateral-incisor areas) were placed. Ridge-expansion, bone graft, low-level laser therapy LLLT and membrane placement were all accomplished (Group II; test group). 6 months following placement of implants, Locator attachments were used to connect the mandibular overdentures to implants. Clinical (Plaque Index; PI, Gingival Index; GI and Probing Depth; PD) and radiographic (Vertical bone loss; VBL and Horizontal bone loss; HBL) parameters were then respectively recorded at:overdentures delivery (baseline, T0), 6 months (T6), and 12 months (T12). Results: For each group, insignificant differences in Pl,GI and HBL between observations were noted. Whereas, there were significant differences in PD between (T0 and T6), (T0 and T12) and (T6 and T12). For Group I, VBL significantly increased (T6 to T12). Howbeit, insignificant differences in PI, GI, PD, VBL and HBL among groups were revealed. Conclusion: Within this study limitation, mandibular knife-edge ridgee xpansion along with concurrent implants placement exhibited comparable clinical and radiographic outcomes to those implanted in unexpanded ridges. Yet, ridge-expansion together with LLLT seems advantageous respecting VBL.