Ela Harka
Research Subjects
Ela Harka has a total of 11 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Alice Al Fara
Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia
1 shared publication - Daniil L. Alshaban
ФГБОУ ВО «Кубанский государственный медицинский университет» Министерства здравоохранения Российской Федерации
1 shared publication - Elena Leonidovna Vinichenko
Kuban State Medical University
1 shared publication - Fatima A. Mafagel
ФГБОУ ВО «Кубанский государственный медицинский университет» Министерства здравоохранения Российской Федерации
1 shared publication - Kristina N. Safronovich
Kirov Military Medical Academy
1 shared publication - Mobina Ezzati
Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 25 March 2026
- Published by ECO-Vector LLC (Publications) in Russian Medicine
- Vol. 32 (3) , 286-293
Bone Defect Reconstruction in Horizontal Mandibular Atrophy Using Periosteal Flap and Guided Bone Regeneration Technique: A Case Report
Horizontal atrophy of the alveolar ridge represents a significant challenge in contemporary dental practice, substantially limiting the possibilities for successful osseointegration of dental implants and requiring the application of various bone grafting methods. Traditional approaches to guided bone regeneration often require the use of additional barrier membranes and fixation elements, and may be associated with increased surgical trauma. This paper presents a clinical case of a modified guided bone regeneration technique using a periosteal flap as a natural barrier membrane, which allows for maximum utilization of the regenerative potential of the patient's own tissues with minimal procedural invasiveness. A 28-year-old patient presented with complaints of missing teeth 3.5 and 3.6 in the left mandibular region. Cone-beam computed tomography revealed significant horizontal bone deficiency with an alveolar ridge width of 2.72 mm in the area of tooth 3.5 and 4.66 mm in the area of tooth 3.6. A guided bone regeneration procedure was performed with periosteal flap formation through split-thickness mucoperiosteal flap technique, creation of multiple cortical perforations, and filling of the subperiosteal space with allogenic material Lioplast. Three months post-intervention, follow-up computed tomography demonstrated an increase in alveolar ridge width of 1.50 mm (55%) in the area of tooth 3.5 and 0.54 mm (12%) in the area of tooth 3.6. Histological examination confirmed the formation of mature bone tissue with active vascularization, presence of lamellar structure in the cortical plate, and cancellous bone with high cellular density of reticular tissue. The presented clinical case demonstrates the high effectiveness of using a periosteal flap as a natural barrier membrane in guided bone regeneration, providing sufficient bone tissue augmentation for subsequent dental implantation with minimal trauma and without the need for additional fixation elements. This approach can be considered as a promising alternative to traditional bone grafting techniques for horizontal atrophy of the mandibular alveolar ridge.
- 25 March 2026
- Published by ECO-Vector LLC (Publications) in Russian Medicine
- Vol. 32 (3) , 286-293
Open AccessBone Defect Reconstruction in Horizontal Mandibular Atrophy Using Periosteal Flap and Guided Bone Regeneration Technique: A Case Report
Horizontal atrophy of the alveolar ridge represents a significant challenge in contemporary dental practice, substantially limiting the possibilities for successful osseointegration of dental implants and requiring the application of various bone grafting methods. Traditional approaches to guided bone regeneration often require the use of additional barrier membranes and fixation elements, and may be associated with increased surgical trauma. This paper presents a clinical case of a modified guided bone regeneration technique using a periosteal flap as a natural barrier membrane, which allows for maximum utilization of the regenerative potential of the patient's own tissues with minimal procedural invasiveness. A 28-year-old patient presented with complaints of missing teeth 3.5 and 3.6 in the left mandibular region. Cone-beam computed tomography revealed significant horizontal bone deficiency with an alveolar ridge width of 2.72 mm in the area of tooth 3.5 and 4.66 mm in the area of tooth 3.6. A guided bone regeneration procedure was performed with periosteal flap formation through split-thickness mucoperiosteal flap technique, creation of multiple cortical perforations, and filling of the subperiosteal space with allogenic material Lioplast. Three months post-intervention, follow-up computed tomography demonstrated an increase in alveolar ridge width of 1.50 mm (55%) in the area of tooth 3.5 and 0.54 mm (12%) in the area of tooth 3.6. Histological examination confirmed the formation of mature bone tissue with active vascularization, presence of lamellar structure in the cortical plate, and cancellous bone with high cellular density of reticular tissue. The presented clinical case demonstrates the high effectiveness of using a periosteal flap as a natural barrier membrane in guided bone regeneration, providing sufficient bone tissue augmentation for subsequent dental implantation with minimal trauma and without the need for additional fixation elements. This approach can be considered as a promising alternative to traditional bone grafting techniques for horizontal atrophy of the mandibular alveolar ridge.
- Open Access
- 21 November 2025
- Published by ECO-Vector LLC (Publications) in Kazan medical journal
- Vol. 106 (6) , 965-976
Guided bone regeneration: application, innovations, and perspectives
Alveolar ridge atrophy following tooth loss is a significant concern in implant dentistry. The ridge height may reduce by up to 50% within a year after tooth extraction. Guided bone regeneration has evolved from an experimental technique to a reliable bone replacement method; however, several issues remain that require further research. Vertical augmentation of major defects remains technically challenging, with no consensus on the best osteoplastic materials and membranes. Furthermore, complications such as premature membrane exposure and infections may limit treatment efficacy. This systematic review examines the use of guided bone regeneration in dentistry and maxillofacial surgery during the last decade. An analysis found that guided bone regeneration provides predictable horizontal and vertical bone augmentation of 3–5 mm and 2–5 mm, respectively. Implant survival in restored bone is comparable to that in intact bone, exceeding 96% over 5 years. Innovations include biologically active substances, such as platelet-enriched plasma and hyaluronic acid, pure magnesium resorbable membranes, ceramics with osteogenic ions, three-dimensional bioprinted scaffolds, and mesenchymal stem cell technologies. Improving guided bone regeneration with new biomaterials and modern techniques will expand clinical indications and provide more favorable long-term outcomes of bone augmentation.
- 21 November 2025
- Published by ECO-Vector LLC (Publications) in Kazan medical journal
- Vol. 106 (6) , 965-976
Open AccessGuided bone regeneration: application, innovations, and perspectives
Alveolar ridge atrophy following tooth loss is a significant concern in implant dentistry. The ridge height may reduce by up to 50% within a year after tooth extraction. Guided bone regeneration has evolved from an experimental technique to a reliable bone replacement method; however, several issues remain that require further research. Vertical augmentation of major defects remains technically challenging, with no consensus on the best osteoplastic materials and membranes. Furthermore, complications such as premature membrane exposure and infections may limit treatment efficacy. This systematic review examines the use of guided bone regeneration in dentistry and maxillofacial surgery during the last decade. An analysis found that guided bone regeneration provides predictable horizontal and vertical bone augmentation of 3–5 mm and 2–5 mm, respectively. Implant survival in restored bone is comparable to that in intact bone, exceeding 96% over 5 years. Innovations include biologically active substances, such as platelet-enriched plasma and hyaluronic acid, pure magnesium resorbable membranes, ceramics with osteogenic ions, three-dimensional bioprinted scaffolds, and mesenchymal stem cell technologies. Improving guided bone regeneration with new biomaterials and modern techniques will expand clinical indications and provide more favorable long-term outcomes of bone augmentation.