Hindawi Publishing Corporation Case Reports in Dentistry Volume 2013, Article ID 154795, 7 pages http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/154795 Case Report Treatment of the Atrophic Upper Jaw: Rehabilitation of Two Complex Cases Andrea Enrico Borgonovo, 1 Andrea Marchetti, 1 Virna Vavassori, 1 Rachele Censi, 2 Ramon Boninsegna, 3 and Dino Re 1 1 Istituto Stomatologico Italiano, Department of Oral Rehabilitation, School of Oral Surgery, University of Milan, via Pace, 21, 20122 Milan, Italy 2 Department of Implantology and Periodontology III, Istituto Stomatologico Italiano, Milan, Italy 3 Department of Clinical and Experimental Sciences, University of Brescia, Italy Correspondence should be addressed to Virna Vavassori; virna.vavassori@hotmail.it Received 22 May 2013; Accepted 29 June 2013 Academic Editors: S. S. de Rossi and R. Sorrentino Copyright © 2013 Andrea Enrico Borgonovo et al. Tis is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. In reconstructive surgery, the fresh frozen homologous bone (FFB) represents a valid alternative to the autologous bone, because FFB allows bone regeneration thanks to its osteoinductive and osteoconductive properties. Te purpose of this work is to describe the surgical-implant-prosthetic treatment of two complex cases using FFB. In particular, fresh frozen homologous bone grafs were used to correct the severe atrophy of the maxilla, and, then, once the graf integration was obtained, implant therapy was performed and implants placed in native bone were immediately loaded. 1. Introduction Te implant-prosthetic rehabilitation is a current practice in clinic dentistry and is characterized by safe and predictable results in the long term [1]. However, in order to obtain the success of implant therapy, in the preliminary stages it is essential to assess and classify the amount of available bone. In fact, this evaluation is fundamental for the correct implant placement, according to the principles of modern prosthetically driven implant placement [2]. Several classifcations have been proposed to assess the amount of available bone. In the Lekholm and Zarb [3] classi- fcation (1985), the jaw bone shape is classifed on a fve degree scale. Cawood and Howell [4] (1988) proposed another classifcation that diferentiates the atrophies according to an analysis of three-dimensional alveolar ridges. Te presence of unfavorable crestal anatomy, which may result from diferent situations such as atrophy, periodontal disease, iatrogenic or congenital defects, trauma, or oncological resection, is not an absolute contraindication to dental implant placement. In fact, with the advances and evolution occurring in implant dentistry, new surgical techniques have been developed and refned in order to allow the correction of bone defects and the implant-prosthetic management of compromised sites. One of the most common procedures for the correction of bone defects involves autologous (or autogenous) bone grafing (bone is harvested from the patient’s own body). Autologous bone is typically harvested from intraoral sources [5] as the chin, the mandibular ramous, the tuber maxilla or from extraoral sources as the iliac crest, the fbula, and even parts of the skull [6]. Other graf materials, which are used in clinical practice, are the xenograf bone substitutes, derived from a species other than human, such as bovine, the allograf bone, like autogenous bone which is derived from humans, and at last, the artifcial bone, such as bioglass, hydroxya- patite, or calcium phosphate [2]. For the reconstruction of extended bone defects, autologous or homologous bone grafs are preferred, in form of blocks, in order to restore the correct vertical and/or horizontal dimensions. Only recently, the homologous bone has been introduced in the reconstructive surgery and maxillofacial surgery, although it has been used for many years in orthopedics for