The surgical and loading implant protocols were reported in 17 studies with no description given in 3 studies (Barrowman et al., Fierz et al., Hessling et al.). The implant placement protocols were diverse with variables including the use of surgical templates/guides, primary and/or secondary implant placement following autogenous bone grafting, and immediate and/or delayed implant loading; however, the majority of the studies reported on delayed implant placement following initial healing of the transported bone graft and delayed loading of the implant fixtures. Six studies reported primary implant placement (Fenlon et al., Ch’ng et al., Zou et al., Burgess et al., Wu et al., Watzinger et al. ) and one study reported immediate implant loading (Chiapasco et al.). Additional procedures were also reported which include removal of reconstruction plates and screws at the time of implant placement, bone condensing to enhance the bone density, and further peri-implant surgery in the form of debulking of soft tissues, gingivoplasty/vestibuloplasty and free mucosal grafts to optimise the soft tissue conditions (Table 1). Prosthodontic reconstruction of the implant fixture was reported in 15 of the studies which included fixed and removable prosthesis and is summarised in Table 1.

Overall implant survival

The overall implant survival of implants placed into autogenous bone grafts varied highly (both at implant and patient levels) between the included studies ranging from 100% with a mean follow-up of 3.5 years ± 0.3 years in a study by Wang et al. to 54% with a mean follow-up 5.4 years ± 3.2 years by Yerit et al..,(at an implant level) (Table 2).