Daniel R Reissmann1, Philipp Poxleitner2, Guido Heydecke3. 1. Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. Electronic address: d.reissmann@uke.de. 2. Department of Oral and Craniomaxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. 3. Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The reconstruction of extended and complex defects of the alveolar bone is a frequent requirement prior to implant placement. The aim of this study was to assess and compare location, intensity, and experience of pain after bone graft harvesting for dental implants with respect to the donor site. METHODS: In this prospective non-randomized intervention study, a consecutive sample of 23 patients who received autologous bone grafts from intra-oral (IO; N = 8) or extra-oral (EO; N = 15) donor sites prior to insertion of dental implants for fixed dental prostheses were recruited. All patients completed a self-administered questionnaire regarding pain location, intensity, and experience at baseline (B; before surgery), at the first follow-up (F1; 3 days after surgery), and at the second follow-up (F2; 4 weeks after surgery). Relative Risk Ratios (RRR) were determined for pain locations. For pain intensity and pain experience, 95% confidence intervals were evaluated using percentiles of a bootstrap with 1000 replications to assess statistical significance. RESULTS: Both patient groups did perceive pain in the mouth/face after the intervention, but patients in the EO donor site group had additional pain at the hip, felt their pain longer and of higher intensity, and had more negative pain experiences than patients with IO donor sites (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: While both IO and EO bone graft harvesting are procedures that are associated with pain in a large proportion of patients, an EO donor site is expected to lead to more pain-related burdens than an IO donor site. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Prior to bone graft harvesting, surgeons can now provide patients with tailored information regarding pain perceptions to be expected. This will help the patients with making an informed decision, and on whether or not to agree with surgery.
OBJECTIVES: The reconstruction of extended and complex defects of the alveolar bone is a frequent requirement prior to implant placement. The aim of this study was to assess and compare location, intensity, and experience of pain after bone graft harvesting for dental implants with respect to the donor site. METHODS: In this prospective non-randomized intervention study, a consecutive sample of 23 patients who received autologous bone grafts from intra-oral (IO; N = 8) or extra-oral (EO; N = 15) donor sites prior to insertion of dental implants for fixed dental prostheses were recruited. All patients completed a self-administered questionnaire regarding pain location, intensity, and experience at baseline (B; before surgery), at the first follow-up (F1; 3 days after surgery), and at the second follow-up (F2; 4 weeks after surgery). Relative Risk Ratios (RRR) were determined for pain locations. For pain intensity and pain experience, 95% confidence intervals were evaluated using percentiles of a bootstrap with 1000 replications to assess statistical significance. RESULTS: Both patient groups did perceive pain in the mouth/face after the intervention, but patients in the EO donor site group had additional pain at the hip, felt their pain longer and of higher intensity, and had more negative pain experiences than patients with IOdonor sites (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: While both IO and EO bone graft harvesting are procedures that are associated with pain in a large proportion of patients, an EO donor site is expected to lead to more pain-related burdens than an IOdonor site. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Prior to bone graft harvesting, surgeons can now provide patients with tailored information regarding pain perceptions to be expected. This will help the patients with making an informed decision, and on whether or not to agree with surgery.
Authors: Fabio Camacho-Alonso; M R Tudela-Mulero; J A Navarro; A J Buendía; A M Mercado-Díaz Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2022-05-07 Impact factor: 3.606