CURRENT PROTOCOLS FOR RECONSTRUCTION OF JAWBONE TISSUE USING OSTEOPLASTIC MATERIALS IN PATIENTS WITH COMPLETE EDENTULISM OR TERMINAL DENTITION: A LITERATURE REVIEW AND CLINICAL CASE

Summary Background. Complete edentulism and terminal dentition are often associated with alveolar bone resorption, maxillary sinus pneumatization, and soft-tissue deficiency, which may compromise prosthetically driven implant placement. The aim was to summarize current approaches to the use of osteoplastic materials (OMs) for jaw reconstruction and illustrate their clinical application in staged full-arch rehabilitation. Materials and methods. A narrative review of publications indexed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, and Google Scholar from 2014 to 2026 was performed. A clinical case of a 52-year-old man with generalized stage III–IV periodontitis, terminal dentition, and partial secondary edentulism was also analyzed. Results. Current evidence supports a prosthetically driven choice of augmentation technique and grafting material. Autogenous bone provides the highest biological potential, whereas xenogeneic and synthetic materials offer greater volumetric stability; combined approaches are useful for complex defects. In the presented case, staged treatment included extraction of hopeless teeth, socket preservation, bilateral sinus floor elevation, mandibular and maxillary implant placement, local augmentation, and full-arch prosthetic rehabilitation. This approach enabled preservation and reconstruction of bone volume and created favorable conditions for implant-supported prostheses. Conclusions. OMs should be selected according to defect morphology, implant position, prosthetic design, esthetic demands, and biomechanics. No single material is universally optimal. Staged augmentation remains justified when less invasive or graftless alternatives cannot provide predictable prosthetic outcomes; long-term follow-up is required to confirm treatment success. Keywords: dentistry, complete edentulism, terminal dentition, osteoplastic materials, alveolar ridge augmentation, dental implantation. Introduction Complete edentulism and terminal dentition are accompanied by progressive resorption of the alveolar processes, altered intermaxillary relationships, maxillary sinus pneumatization, and soft-tissue deficiency. These changes complicate the placement of dental implants in prosthetically appropriate positions and may limit the restoration of function, esthetics, and cleanability of full-arch prosthetic restorations [18, 25, 34]. The availability and actual use of implant-supported prostheses among older patients may also vary with social factors, which should be considered when planning prolonged and resource-intensive reconstructive protocols [14]. The use of osteoplastic materials (OMs) enables increased available bone volume, restoration of the alveolar ridge contour, and the creation of conditions for prosthetically driven implant placement. At the same time, material selection should be based on the location and morphology of the defect, the required reconstruction volume, the method of graft stabilization, the type of future prosthesis, and the acceptable degree of surgical morbidity [4, 42, 44]. The aim of this study was to summarize current approaches to the use of osteoplastic materials for jaw bone reconstruction in patients with complete edentulism or terminal dentition and to demonstrate their clinical application using a staged implant-prosthetic rehabilitation protocol. Conclusions The use of OMs in patients with complete edentulism or terminal dentition should be prosthetically driven. It should take into account not only bone deficiency but also implant position, prosthetic design, esthetic requirements, and biomechanical considerations. No universal OM currently exists: autogenous bone has the highest biological potential, whereas xenogeneic and synthetic materials primarily provide volume maintenance; in complex defects, their combined use may be appropriate. Selection of the augmentation technique is determined by defect morphology, blood supply, the possibility of primary wound closure, and implant stability. Large defects more often require staged treatment, whereas short or tilted implants and graftless protocols may shorten rehabilitation. Augmentation is justified when alternative approaches cannot provide optimal implant positioning and a predictable functional and esthetic outcome. The clinical case demonstrates a staged combination of socket preservation, local augmentation, and bilateral sinus floor elevation as part of full-arch rehabilitation. The final assessment of treatment success requires a completed long-term follow-up.