| Literature DB >> 23213501 |
Antonio Jorge V Forte1, Renato da Silva Freitas, Nivaldo Alonso.
Abstract
Several authors have proposed classifications to analyze the quality over time of secondary alveolar bone grafting. However, little discussion has been held to quantitatively measure the secondary bone grafting for correction of nasal deformity associated to cleft palate and lip. Twenty patients with unilateral alveolar cleft, who underwent secondary alveolar bone grafting, were studied with 3D computer tomography. The height between the inferior portion of the pyriform aperture and the incisal border of the unaffected side (height A) and the affected side (height B) was measured using a software Mirror. A percentage was then obtained dividing the height B by the height A and classified into grades I, II, and III if the value was greater than 67%, between 34% and 66%, or less than 33%. Age, time of followup, initial operation, and age of canine eruption were also recorded. All patients presented appropriate occlusion and function. Mean time of followup was 7 years, and mean initial age for operation was 10 years old. 16 patients were rated as grade I and 4 patients as grade II. No cases had grade III. We present a new grading system that can be used to assess the success of secondary bone grafting in patients who underwent alveolar cleft repair.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23213501 PMCID: PMC3503285 DOI: 10.1155/2012/259419
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plast Surg Int ISSN: 2090-1461
Literature review of major publications involving description of grading system to assess secondary bone grafting.
| First author | Journal | Grading system |
|---|---|---|
|
Abyholm 1981 [ | SJPRS | Radiographical measurement of interalveolar septum height as a grading system: type I (height approximately normal), type II (at least 3/4 of normal height), type III (less than 3/4 of normal height), and type IV (failure) |
| Bergland 1986 [ | CPJ | Popularized the Oslo grading system, which is described above |
| Long Jr 1995 [ | CPCJ | Studied contours of the grafted bone, using ratios. The measurements included the amount of notching of the bone graft, the length of the proximal and distal segment anatomic root, the location of the alveolar crest, and the size of the most coronal attachment of the bone bilaterally |
| Kindelan 1997 [ | CPCJ | 4-point scale that measured the degree of bony filling in the cleft area when compared to its initial bone graft site. Grade I (more than 75% bony filling), grade II (50 to 75% bony filling), grade III (less than 50% bony filling), and grade IV (no complete bony bridge) |
| Witherow 2002 [ | CPCJ | 8-point scale to describe position of bone graft after secondary alveolar grafting in relation to the cleft roots. Depending on the positions of the bony bridge across the cleft, the X-rays were classified into one of six groups (A to F). May be used with mixed dentition. |
| Hynes 2003 [ | BJPS | Modification for the Oslo grading system using periapical dental X-ray. The occlusal level, the basal level, and the total height of the newly acquired bone in the alveolar cleft were graded using the Oslo system, and the bone graft height was compared with the expected height of normal interdental alveolar bone in corresponding films |
Journals: BJPS: British Journal of Plastic Surgery; CPCJ: Cleft and Palate Craniofacial Journal; CPJ: Cleft Palate Journal; SJPRS: Scandinavian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.
Figure 1Classification based on pyriform aperture. Grade I: 67–100%; grade II: 34–66%; grade III: 0–33%.
Description of new grading system to assess secondary bone grafting.
| Grade | Percentage affected/unaffected side |
|---|---|
| I | Above 67% |
| II | 34–66% |
| III | 33% or less |
Figure 2Patient with grade I. (a) CT scan view; (b) occlusal view; (c) dental X-ray.
Figure 3Patient with grade II. (a) CT scan view; (b) occlusal view; (c) dental X-ray.
Figure 4Patient with grade II. (a) CT scan view; (b) occlusal view; (c) panorex demonstrating dental implant.