Comparison of Split Box and Split Bone Block Techniques in Horizontal Ridge Augmentation

NCT07656662 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: 2025-11-02/2025-86
• Study Type: observational
• Target: 31
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

Horizontal alveolar ridge deficiencies may prevent the placement of dental implants and often require bone augmentation procedures before implant treatment. Two techniques commonly used for horizontal ridge augmentation are the Split Box Technique and the Split Bone Block Technique. This retrospective study included patients treated at Marmara University Faculty of Dentistry between January 2014 and January 2026. Radiographic records were reviewed to evaluate bone gain after augmentation and the stability of the augmented bone during long-term follow-up. Implant survival after prosthetic rehabilitation was also assessed. The purpose of this study was to compare the long-term outcomes of the Split Box Technique and the Split Bone Block Technique in terms of bone gain, bone stability, and implant survival.

Conditions

Horizontal Alveolar Ridge Deficiency

Keywords

Split Box Technique; Split Bone Block Technique; Horizontal Ridge Augmentation; Dental Implants; Bone Resorption; Implant Survival; CBCT

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• Long-Term Horizontal Bone Gain

  Overall change in horizontal alveolar ridge width from baseline to long-term follow-up after prosthetic loading, measured on CBCT images.

  From baseline (preoperative CBCT) to long-term follow-up after prosthetic loading(average follow-up: 4.2 years)

Secondary Outcomes (4)

• Implant Survival Rate

  From implant placement through study completion (average follow-up: 4.2 years)

• Postoperative Complications

  From augmentation surgery through study completion (average follow-up: 4.2 years)

• Long-Term Bone Resorption

  From 6 months after augmentation surgery to long-term follow-up after prosthetic loading (average follow-up: 4.2 years)

• Horizontal Bone Gain

  From baseline (preoperative CBCT) to 6 months after augmentation surgery

Study Arms (2)

Split Bone Block Technique (SBBT)

Patients who underwent horizontal alveolar ridge augmentation using the Split Bone Block Technique.

Procedure: Split Bone Block Technique

Split Box Technique (SBT)

Patients who underwent horizontal alveolar ridge augmentation using the Split Box Technique.

Procedure: Split Box Technique

Interventions

Split Bone Block Technique PROCEDURE

Autogenous horizontal ridge augmentation procedure using cortical bone plates harvested from the mandibular ramus to reconstruct deficient alveolar ridges prior to implant placement.

Also known as: SBBT

Split Bone Block Technique (SBBT)

Split Box Technique PROCEDURE

Autogenous horizontal ridge augmentation procedure involving mobilization and fixation of a buccal bone segment to increase horizontal ridge width prior to implant placement.

Also known as: SBT

Split Box Technique (SBT)

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 18 Years+
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: No
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)
• Sampling Method: Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

The study population consisted of adult patients with horizontal alveolar ridge deficiencies who underwent horizontal ridge augmentation using either the Split Box Technique or the Split Bone Block Technique before implant placement. Patients were treated at Marmara University Faculty of Dentistry between January 2014 and January 2026 and had complete clinical records and CBCT imaging available for retrospective evaluation.

You may qualify if:

• Age ≥18 years.
• Patients with horizontal alveolar ridge deficiency requiring horizontal ridge augmentation before implant placement.
• Patients treated with either the Split Box Technique (SBT) or Split Bone Block Technique (SBBT) at Marmara University Faculty of Dentistry between January 2014 and January 2026.
• Availability of complete radiographic records, including CBCT scans obtained preoperatively (T0), 6 months after augmentation (T1), and during long-term follow-up after prosthetic loading (T2).
• Availability of complete clinical records and follow-up data.

You may not qualify if:

• Incomplete clinical or radiographic records.
• Patients lost to follow-up.
• Presence of uncontrolled systemic diseases or conditions known to adversely affect bone healing.
• Use of medications known to interfere with bone metabolism or healing.
• Active infection at the augmentation site or complications that altered the planned treatment protocol.

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Marmara University: lead

Study Sites (1)

Marmara University Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

Istanbul, Istanbul, 34854, Turkey (Türkiye)

Location

Related Publications (2)

• Dergin G, Kirac Can SB, Can S. A novel approach for horizontal augmentation with split box: A method that combines split bone block and ridge split techniques. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2024 Dec;125(6):101790. doi: 10.1016/j.jormas.2024.101790. Epub 2024 Feb 1.

  PMID: 38296024 RESULT

• Khoury F, Hanser T. Mandibular bone block harvesting from the retromolar region: a 10-year prospective clinical study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015 May-Jun;30(3):688-97. doi: 10.11607/jomi.4117.

  PMID: 26009921 RESULT

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Bone Resorption

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Bone Diseases; Musculoskeletal Diseases

Study Officials

• Guhan Dergin, DDS, PhD

  Marmara University Faculty of Dentistry

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

• Study Type: observational
• Observational Model: COHORT
• Time Perspective: RETROSPECTIVE
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: June 5, 2026
• First Posted: June 18, 2026
• Study Start: January 1, 2014
• Primary Completion: January 1, 2026
• Study Completion: January 1, 2026
• Last Updated: June 18, 2026

Record last verified: 2026-06

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

TU (1)