Alveolar distraction osteogenesis versus inlay bone grafting in posterior mandibular atrophy: a prospective study

被引:103
作者
Bianchi, Alberto [1 ]
Felice, Pietro
Lizio, Giuseppe
Marchetti, Claudio [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Bologna, Postgrad Sch Maxillofacial Surg, I-40126 Bologna, Italy
[2] Univ Bologna, Dept Oral & Dent Sci, I-40126 Bologna, Italy
来源
ORAL SURGERY ORAL MEDICINE ORAL PATHOLOGY ORAL RADIOLOGY AND ENDODONTOLOGY | 2008年 / 105卷 / 03期
关键词
D O I
10.1016/j.tripleo.2007.07.009
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objective. The objective of this study was to compare bone gain, implant survival, implant success, bone resorption, and complication rate in groups of patients who underwent distraction osteogenesis (DO) and inlay bone grafting (Inlay) for preprosthetic issues in the atrophic posterior mandible. Study design. Twelve surgical sites were randomly assigned to 2 treatment groups: group A: DO and group B: Inlay. After 3 to 4 months, 16 fixtures in the DO group and 21 in the Inlay group were placed for fixed prosthetic rehabilitation. The median follow-up was 26 months. Results. The median bone gain was 10 versus 5.8 mm (DO versus Inlay, P = .003); the median bone resorption was 1.4 mm versus 0.9 mm (DO versus Inlay, P = .088). The implant survival rate was 100% for each group, while the implant success rate was 93.7% (DO) versus 95.2% (Inlay) (P > .05). The complication rate was 60% for DO and 14.3% for Inlay (P < .05). Conclusion. DO obtained more vertical bone gain than Inlay, but was more prone to complications in the pre-implantology phase. The implant results in each group were comparable to those in native alveolar bone.
引用
收藏
页码:282 / 292
页数:11
相关论文
共 42 条
  • [1] Albrektsson T, 1986, Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, V1, P11
  • [2] BLOCK M, 1996, J ORAL MAXILLOFAC SU, V21, P92
  • [3] Osteogenic alveolar distraction: A review of the literature
    Cano, J
    Campo, P
    Moreno, LA
    Bascones, A
    [J]. ORAL SURGERY ORAL MEDICINE ORAL PATHOLOGY ORAL RADIOLOGY AND ENDODONTOLOGY, 2006, 101 (01): : 11 - 28
  • [4] A CLASSIFICATION OF THE EDENTULOUS JAWS
    CAWOOD, JI
    HOWELL, RA
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 1988, 17 (04) : 232 - 236
  • [5] Chiapasco M, 2004, INT J ORAL MAX IMPL, V19, P399
  • [6] Alveolar distraction osteogenesis vs. vertical guided bone regeneration for the correction of vertically deficient edentulous ridges: A 1-3-year prospective study on humans
    Chiapasco, M
    Romeo, E
    Casentini, P
    Rimondini, L
    [J]. CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2004, 15 (01) : 82 - 95
  • [7] Chiapasco M, 2001, INT J ORAL MAX IMPL, V16, P43
  • [8] Quality and quantity of bone following alveolar distraction osteogenesis in the human mandible
    Chiapasco, Matteo
    Lang, Niklaus P.
    Bosshardt, Dieter D.
    [J]. CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2006, 17 (04) : 394 - 402
  • [9] Distraction osteogenesis in maxillofacial surgery using internal devices: Review of five cases
    Chin, M
    Toth, BA
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 1996, 54 (01) : 45 - 53
  • [10] Use of the sandwich osteotomy plus an interpositional allograft for vertical augmentation of the alveolar ridge
    Choi, BH
    Lee, SHR
    Huh, JY
    Han, SG
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CRANIO-MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2004, 32 (01) : 51 - 54