Bone-Grafting Materials in Oral Surgery: Classification, Biological Properties, and Clinical Application

Авторы

  • Mashhura Jumaqulova Автор
  • Javohir Buzrukzoda Автор

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20794584

Ключевые слова:

modern dentistry, oral surgery, bone regeneration, dental implantation, bone grafting, osteoplasty, alveolar ridge, biocompatibility.

Аннотация

Background. The rapid development of dental implantology and reconstructive oral surgery has significantly
increased the demand for reliable and predictable methods of restoring maxillofacial bone volume. Alveolar ridge atrophy,
inflammatory diseases, trauma, and surgical interventions frequently result in severe bone deficiencies that compromise
successful patient rehabilitation.
Objective. This study aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of contemporary bone-grafting materials by evaluating
their classification, biological properties, tissue-engineering mechanisms, and clinical applications in oral surgery.
Methods. A comprehensive review of recent national and international scientific literature was conducted. Particular attention
was paid to the comparative assessment of autogenous, allogeneic, xenogeneic, and synthetic bone substitutes,
focusing on their osteogenic, osteoinductive, and osteoconductive characteristics.
Results. The review highlights the specific biological behavior of different grafting materials. Autogenous bone remains
the gold standard because it possesses the complete triad of regenerative properties, despite the risk of donor-site
morbidity. Xenogeneic and synthetic materials, including hydroxyapatite and β-tricalcium phosphate, exhibit high biocompatibility,
predictable physicochemical stability, and excellent volume preservation, making them highly effective for sinus
augmentation and socket preservation procedures.
Conclusion. Successful bone augmentation largely depends on the individualized selection of grafting materials, taking
into account defect size, local vascularization, and the patient’s systemic health status. A thorough understanding of the
biological and clinical properties of these materials is essential for dental students and practicing oral surgeons to achieve
predictable treatment outcomes

Биографии авторов

  • Mashhura Jumaqulova

    Clinical Residents of the Department of Dental Implantology

  • Javohir Buzrukzoda

    Scientific adviser: PhD., dos.,
    Department of Oral Surgery and Dental Implantology

Библиографические ссылки

1. Albrektsson T., Johansson C. Osteoinduction, osteoconduction and osseointegration // European Spine Journal. -

2001. - Vol. 10(Suppl. 2). - P. S96-S101.

2. Aghaloo T.L., Moy P.K. Which hard tissue augmentation techniques are the most successful in furnishing bony support

for implant placement? // International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants. - 2007. - Vol. 22(Suppl.). - P. 49-70.

3. Giannoudis P.V., Dinopoulos H., Tsiridis E. Bone substitutes: An update // Injury. - 2005. - Vol. 36(Suppl. 3). - P. S20-

S27.

4. Jensen S.S., Terheyden H. Bone augmentation procedures in localized defects in the alveolar ridge: Clinical results

with different bone grafts and bone-substitute materials // International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants. - 2009.

- Vol. 24(Suppl.). - P. 218-236.

5. Nkenke E., Neukam F.W. Autogenous bone harvesting and grafting in advanced jaw resorption: Morbidity, resorption

and implant survival // European Journal of Oral Implantology. - 2014. - Vol. 7(Suppl. 2). - P. S203-S217.

6. Sheikh Z., Hamdan N., Ikeda Y., Grynpas M., Ganss B., Glogauer M. Natural graft tissues and synthetic biomaterials

for periodontal and alveolar bone reconstructive applications: A review // Materials. - 2017. - Vol. 10. - No. 5. - Article

497.

7. Aludden H.C., Mordenfeld A., Hallman M. Lateral ridge augmentation with Bio-Oss alone or Bio-Oss mixed with

autogenous bone graft: A systematic review // Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research. - 2017. - Vol. 19. - No.

4. - P. 733-745.

8. Urban I.A., Monje A., Lozada J.L., Wang H.L. Principles for vertical ridge augmentation in the atrophic posterior mandible:

A technical review // International Journal of Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry. - 2017. - Vol. 37. - No. 5. - P.

639-645.

9. Sakkas A., Wilde F., Heufelder M., Winter K., Schramm A. Autogenous bone grafts in oral implantology-Is it still a gold

standard? // Journal of Clinical Medicine. - 2017. - Vol. 6. - No. 3. - Article 27.

10. Khojasteh A., Kheiri L., Motamedian S.R. Regenerative medicine in oral and maxillofacial surgery: Current trends and

future perspectives // Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology and Oral Radiology. – 2019. - Vol. 127. - No. 3. - P.

229-241.

11. Miron R.J., Zhang Y.F. Osteoinduction: A review of old concepts with new standards // Journal of Dental Research. -

2012. - Vol. 91. - No. 8. - P. 736-744.

12. Nandi S.K., Roy S., Mukherjee P., Kundu B., De D.K., Basu D. Orthopaedic applications of bone graft and graft substitutes:

A review // Indian Journal of Medical Research. - 2010. - Vol. 132. - P. 15-30.

13. Buser D., Dula K., Belser U., Hirt H.P., Berthold H. Localized ridge augmentation using guided bone regeneration.

Surgical procedure in the maxilla // International Journal of Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry. - 1993. - Vol. 13. -

No. 1. - P. 29-45.

14. Dahlin C., Sennerby L., Lekholm U., Linde A., Nyman S. Generation of new bone around titanium implants using a

membrane technique: An experimental study in rabbits // International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants. -

1989. - Vol. 4. - No. 1. - P. 19-25.

15. Araujo M.G., Lindhe J. Ridge preservation with the use of Bio-Oss collagen: A six-month study in the dog // Clinical

Oral Implants Research. - 2009. - Vol. 20. - No. 5. - P. 433-440.

16. Cordaro L., Torsello F., Miuccio M.T., Di Torresanto V.M., Eliopoulos D. Mandibular bone harvesting for alveolar reconstruction

and implant placement: Subjective and objective cross-sectional evaluation of donor and recipient site up to

4 years // Clinical Oral Implants Research. - 2011. - Vol. 22. - No. 11. - P. 1320-1326.

17. Schmitt C.M., Doering H., Schmidt T., Lutz R., Neukam F.W., Schlegel K.A. Histological results after maxillary sinus

augmentation with Straumann BoneCeramic, Bio-Oss, Puros, and autologous bone. A randomized controlled clinical

trial // Clinical Oral Implants Research. - 2013. - Vol. 24. - No. 5. - P. 576-585.

18. Traini T., Valentini P., Iezzi G., Piattelli A. A histologic and histomorphometric evaluation of anorganic bovine bone

retrieved 9 years after a sinus augmentation procedure // Journal of Periodontology. - 2007. - Vol. 78. - No. 5. - P.

955-961.

19. Marx R.E. Bone and bone graft healing // Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Clinics of North America. - 2007. - Vol. 19. -

No. 4. - P. 455-466.

20. Wang H.L., Boyapati L. “PASS” principles for predictable bone regeneration // Implant Dentistry. - 2006. - Vol. 15. - No.

1. - P. 8-17.

Опубликован

2026-06-16

Как цитировать

Bone-Grafting Materials in Oral Surgery: Classification, Biological Properties, and Clinical Application. (2026). MAKTABGACHA VA MAKTAB TA’LIMI JURNALI, 4(6). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20794584