Literature DB >> 12378486

Staged reconstruction of the severely atrophic mandible with autogenous bone graft and endosteal implants.

R Bryan Bell1, George H Blakey, Raymond P White, Dennis G Hillebrand, Anthony Molina.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Vastly different surgical techniques have been advocated for osseous reconstruction of the severely atrophic mandible. Endosseous implants placed in autologous bone grafts have been proposed to minimize graft resorption and restore function; however, sufficient bone must exist to support the implants and prevent pathologic fracture. The purpose of this retrospective analysis was to assess the efficacy of autologous bone grafting and the subsequent placement of endosteal implants as a staged procedure in patients with severely atrophic mandibles.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The records of all patients presenting to The University of North Carolina for treatment from 1997 to 1999 with atrophic mandibles (vertical mandibular height <7 mm as measured on panoramic radiographs in at least 1 site at the mandibular midline and at the thinnest portion of the mandibular body) were reviewed. Bone height was assessed preoperatively, immediately postoperatively, at the time of implant placement (4 to 6 months), and again at 12 and 24 months after bone grafting from posterior iliac crest to the mandible via an extraoral approach. Five endosteal implants were subsequently placed in each patient as a delayed procedure 4 to 6 months after bone grafting, and prosthetic rehabilitation was completed with implant supported prostheses.
RESULTS: Fourteen consecutive patients were identified with a median preoperative bone height of 9 mm (interquartile range, 25th to 75th percentile [IQ], 7 to 10 mm) in the mandibular midline and 5 mm (IQ, 2 to 5 mm) in the body region. There were no perioperative complications. Median estimated blood loss during the bone graft procedure, as estimated by the surgeon and the anesthesiologist, was 300 mL (IQ, 150 to 1,100 mL), and 1 patient required blood transfusion secondary to symptomatic anemia. The mean loss of vertical bone height after grafting and during the 4 to 6 months before implant placement was 33%. After implant placement and at 12 months, the vertical bone loss was negligible in the implant-supported region and less than 11% in the body region.
CONCLUSION: Reconstruction of the severely atrophic mandible using autogenous corticocancellous bone grafts followed by placement of osseointegrated implants in 4 to 6 months can restore and maintain mandibular bone sufficient to support implants and facilitate successful restoration of occlusion. A prospective study is planned to identify predictors of successful outcomes compared with other surgical/prosthetic treatment. Copyright 2002 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12378486     DOI: 10.1053/joms.2002.34986

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg        ISSN: 0278-2391            Impact factor:   1.895


  17 in total

1.  Alveolar ridge augmentation using distraction osteogenesis: a clinical trial.

Authors:  Anand Shukla; Saumyendra V Singh; Sumit Kumar; Divya Mehrotra; S Mohammad; Stuti Singh
Journal:  J Oral Biol Craniofac Res       Date:  2012 Jan-Apr

2.  Assessment of donor site morbidity for free radial forearm osteocutaneous flaps.

Authors:  Catherine F Sinclair; John P Gleysteen; Terence M Zimmermann; Mark K Wax; Babak Givi; Daniel Schneider; Eben L Rosenthal
Journal:  Microsurgery       Date:  2012-03-31       Impact factor: 2.425

3.  Implant-supported rehabilitation after treatment of atrophic mandibular fractures: report of two cases.

Authors:  Leandro Benetti de Oliveira; Marisa Aparecida Cabrini Gabrielli; Mario Francisco Real Gabrielli; Valfrido Antonio Pereira Pereira-Filho
Journal:  Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2015-05-22

4.  Mandibular fractures associated with endosteal implants.

Authors:  Bruno Ramos Chrcanovic; Antônio Luís Neto Custódio
Journal:  Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2009-12

Review 5.  Comparison of Autogenous Tooth Materials and Other Bone Grafts.

Authors:  Shuxin Zhang; Xuehan Li; Yanxin Qi; Xiaoqian Ma; Shuzhan Qiao; HongXin Cai; Bing Cheng Zhao; Heng Bo Jiang; Eui-Seok Lee
Journal:  Tissue Eng Regen Med       Date:  2021-04-30       Impact factor: 4.169

6.  Analysis of micromovements and peri-implant stresses and strains around ultra-short implants - A three-dimensional finite-element method study.

Authors:  Nida Sumra; Shrikar Desai; Rohit Kulshrestha; Khusbhu Mishra; Raahat Vikram Singh; Prachi Gaonkar
Journal:  J Indian Soc Periodontol       Date:  2021-07-01

7.  Short implants: A systematic review.

Authors:  I Karthikeyan; Shrikar R Desai; Rika Singh
Journal:  J Indian Soc Periodontol       Date:  2012-07

8.  Sandwich osteotomy of the atrophic posterior mandible prior to implant placement.

Authors:  Luan Mavriqi; Egresa Baca; Ariona Demiraj
Journal:  Clin Case Rep       Date:  2015-06-05

9.  [Not Available].

Authors:  B I Simon; A L Zatcoff; J J W Kong; S M O'Connell
Journal:  Open Dent J       Date:  2009-05-20

10.  Dentin dysplasia type I: a challenge for treatment with dental implants.

Authors:  Rita A Depprich; Michelle A Ommerborn; Jörg G K Handschel; Christian D Naujoks; Ulrich Meyer; Norbert R Kübler
Journal:  Head Face Med       Date:  2007-08-22       Impact factor: 2.151

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.