PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 3, 2026Journal of Functional Biomaterials2 citationsOpen Access

Bone Substitutes in Alveolar Ridge Augmentation: A Narrative Literature Review

View Full Paper
MBMarija BubaloSDSanja DugonjićDDDejan Dubovina

Key Points

  • The review analyzes biological principles and properties of bone graft materials for alveolar ridge augmentation.
  • Literature reviewed from 2000 to 2025
  • Comparison of different graft materials and their properties
  • Evaluation of clinical outcomes related to graft integration and bone formation
  • Discussion of emerging regenerative strategies
  • Autogenous bone is identified as the gold standard due to its optimal properties.
  • Different graft materials exhibit varying levels of osteogenic, osteoinductive, and osteoconductive properties.
  • No single ideal material exists, highlighting the need for tailored selection based on clinical objectives.

Abstract

Adequate alveolar bone volume is a prerequisite for predictable and long-term success in dental implant therapy. Physiological post-extraction remodeling frequently results in horizontal and vertical ridge deficiencies, which may compromise optimal implant placement. Guided bone regeneration (GBR) has become a cornerstone procedure in implant dentistry, with clinical outcomes largely influenced by the biological and mechanical characteristics of grafting materials. Different bone grafts and their combinations are currently clinically applicable, each exhibiting distinct osteogenic, osteoinductive, and osteoconductive properties, as well as varying resorption profiles and volumetric stability. This narrative review aims to analyze the biological principles of alveolar ridge augmentation, compare the properties of commonly used graft materials, evaluate clinical outcomes, and discuss emerging regenerative strategies. Literature published between 2000 and 2025 was assessed to synthesize current evidence regarding graft integration, bone formation, desorption dynamics, and clinical indications. Autogenous bone remains the gold standard due to its combined osteogenic, osteoinductive, and osteoconductive potential; however, its limitations have driven the development of alternative materials, including allografts, xenografts, alloplastic substitutes, demineralized tooth matrices, platelet concentrates, and customized scaffolds. While no single material is universally ideal, appropriate selection based on defect characteristics and clinical objectives is essential for predictable outcomes. Future research should prioritize long-term comparative trials, biomaterial standardization, and biologically enhanced regenerative approaches.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Bubalo et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69cf5e015a333a821460c191https://doi.org/10.3390/jfb17040176
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Platelet‐Rich Fibrin Combined With a Porous Hydroxyapatite Graft for the Treatment of 3‐Wall Intrabony Defects in Chronic Periodontitis: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial2012 · 121 citations
  2. 2Primary stability of implant placement and loading related to dental implant materials and designs: A literature review2023 · 93 citations
  3. 3The Effect of Defect Morphology and Membrane Fixation on 3D Graft Material Displacement During Primary Wound Closure in Horizontal Bone Augmentation—An Ex Vivo Study2025 · 3 citations
  4. 4Efficacy of the autogenous dentin graft for implant placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials2022 · 31 citations
  5. 5A prospective clinical study of non‐submerged immediate implants: clinical outcomes and esthetic results2007 · 405 citations