Implant rehabilitation using titanium screw-shaped implants has been an extremely important innovation as reported in numerous publications over the years. In the beginning of the implant era, the anterior mandible was the primary implant site because it demonstrated remarkably good results in long-term follow-up studies (Adell 1981; Albrektsson 1997). Long-term results point to the impressive stability and safety of the procedure. Over time, the use of implants in other sites such as the maxilla and posterior mandible have shown almost the same predictability (Adell implants are continuously introduced into the market, often with little or no scientific documentation; however, the screw-shaped implant has the longest and most reliable documentation available today. The mandible demonstrates the highest predictability of results, especially in the frontal region between the mental foramina. It is possible to consider immediate loading of the implants due to the mandible’s initial stability compared to the maxilla, which in most cases is considerably more problematic in relation to bone quality and quantity. Patients with poorer bone quality and less quantity of bone have been excluded from implant treatment for a long time. However, the advent of bone reconstruction of deficient areas, both in the mandible and the maxilla, has improved the possibility of treatment for the bone deficient patient. Different bone grafting techniques have been developed and orthognathic surgical procedures adapted to the special demands of implant surgery have meant that most bone problems can now be solved. One-stage techniques employ grafting and implant surgery in the same operative procedure, whereas two-stage techniques employgrafting and reconstruction in one procedure and implant surgery in second phase. Depending on the amount of bone graft necessary, the source for the graft can been chosen from different parts of the body.If only small amounts of bone graft are necessary for the implant site, bone may be harvested from the mandible or maxilla, for example, from the mandibular symphysis region, mandibular angle and ramus, maxillary tuberosita or adjacent to the implant site. Using bone collectors, it is also possible to filter out bone powder during drilling of the implant site. Bone substitutes or demineralized bone in combination  with autogenous bone material have also been shown to function well in alveolar bone reconstruction (Henry Bone grafts have been used in oral and maxillofacial surgery for a long time in for the reconstruction of the jaw bones to rectify facial deformities, for pre-prosthetic reconstruction, and also for reconstruction after trauma and tumour damage. Where the bone graft has been used as a bridge over bony defects or filling out defects, the results have been good, but when used as an augmentation material for preprosthetic reconstruction, more progressive resorption of the graft has occurred. Onlay bone grafting in connection with implant surgery was the first method developed to overcome the bone deficient maxilla, however, the graft in an onlay position with or without a denture on top of it has not been a predictable procedure (Gordh 1998). The graft was most frequently taken from the iliac crest, initially as a horseshoeshaped graft in one or two pieces. The graft was modeled to fit the alveolar crest and stabilized with the implants into the residual bone.  Surgical techniques for the rehabilitation of severe bone deficiencies in the maxilla are described and detailed illustrations of patient cases are provided. et al. 1996; Pinholt et al. 1992).   

Kahnberg, K.-E. (2008) Frontmatter, in Bone Grafting Techniques for Maxillary Implants, Blackwell Munksgaard, Oxford, UK. doi: 10.1002/9780470759578.fmatter