An observational study in Horizontal Alveolar Ridge Deficiency, sponsored by Marmara University. Completed at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-06-18.
Sponsored by Marmara University · Observational
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.
Horizontal alveolar ridge deficiencies often require augmentation procedures before dental implant placement. Among the available augmentation methods, the Split Bone Block Technique (SBBT) and the Split Box Technique (SBT) are autogenous bone augmentation approaches designed to increase horizontal ridge width and facilitate implant-supported rehabilitation.
The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the radiological outcomes of SBBT and SBT with respect to horizontal bone gain, long-term bone stability, and implant survival. In addition, postoperative complications associated with both techniques were evaluated.
Patients treated between January 2014 and January 2026 at the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Marmara University Faculty of Dentistry, were retrospectively screened. Patients who underwent horizontal ridge augmentation using either SBBT or SBT and had complete radiographic follow-up records were included in the study.
Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images obtained preoperatively, 6 months after augmentation, and during long-term follow-up after prosthetic rehabilitation were used to assess changes in horizontal bone width and graft stability. Radiological measurements were performed to evaluate bone gain after augmentation, dimensional changes during follow-up, and long-term maintenance of the augmented ridge.
The primary outcome measures were horizontal bone gain and long-term bone resorption. Secondary outcome measures included implant survival following definitive prosthetic rehabilitation and the occurrence of postoperative complications.
The study was designed to determine whether the Split Box Technique and the Split Bone Block Technique provide comparable long-term clinical and radiological outcomes for the treatment of horizontal alveolar ridge deficiencies prior to implant placement.
167 studies on the registry are indexed under Bone Resorption; 28 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 31 is below the median of 43 across 18 observational studies indexed under Bone Resorption.
Browse Bone Resorption studies →Marmara University is the lead sponsor of 599 studies on the registry; 138 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
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.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Patients who underwent horizontal alveolar ridge augmentation using the Split Bone Block Technique.
Procedure: Split Bone Block Technique
Patients who underwent horizontal alveolar ridge augmentation using the Split Box Technique.
Procedure: Split Box Technique
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
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
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.
Time frame: From baseline (preoperative CBCT) to long-term follow-up after prosthetic loading(average follow-up: 4.2 years)
Implant Survival Rate
Survival of dental implants placed in augmented sites following prosthetic rehabilitation.
Time frame: From implant placement through study completion (average follow-up: 4.2 years)
Postoperative Complications
Occurrence of complications related to augmentation procedures, including wound dehiscence, infection, graft exposure, and neurosensory disturbances.
Time frame: From augmentation surgery through study completion (average follow-up: 4.2 years)
Long-Term Bone Resorption
Change in horizontal ridge width between the post-augmentation healing period and long-term follow-up, measured on CBCT images.
Time frame: From 6 months after augmentation surgery to long-term follow-up after prosthetic loading (average follow-up: 4.2 years)
Horizontal Bone Gain
Change in horizontal alveolar ridge width from baseline to 6 months after augmentation, measured on CBCT images.
Time frame: From baseline (preoperative CBCT) to 6 months after augmentation surgery
Plan to share: No
Ran from Jan 2014 to primary completion in Jan 2026, 144 months.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
This study is completed, as verified in Jun 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.