The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants · 2017
Vertical Osseodistraction with a New Intraosseous Alveolar Distractor Prototype for Dental Implant Rehabilitation: A Pilot Study in Dogs.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Esposito Marco, Trullenque-Eriksson Anna, Vila Carlos Navarro, Peñarrocha Miguel, García Abel, Sánchez Arturo, Muñoz-Guzón Fernando, Martínez Martín José Manuel
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate in dogs a newly developed intraosseous alveolar distractor (Mozo-Grau Alveolar Distractor) for vertical bone augmentation to allow placement of dental implants.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four dogs had their posterior teeth removed, and sockets were left to heal for 20 weeks. The right and left sides of the posterior mandibles were randomly allocated, according to a split-mouth design, to receive either two distractors, distracting a 32-mm-long bone segment, or two distractors supporting one bony segment 20 mm long and one 8 mm long. Each side of the jaw was treated by a different operator. Eight days after placement, distractors were activated with one complete turn (corresponding to 0.75 mm of vertical distraction) per day for 8 days, followed by a latency period of 10 weeks. Distractors were removed, and seven dental implants of two randomly allocated designs were placed in each dog. Implants were submerged for 2 months, and the dogs were sacrificed. Outcome measures were: success of the augmentation procedure (defined as a vertical gain of at least 5 mm of bone), any complications, implant failure, bone-to-implant contact (BIC), and peri-implant marginal bone level changes.
RESULTS: One dog was withdrawn because of a mandible fracture. Eight complications occurred, and six osseodistractors were lost, but no implant failed. Only two segments in one dog achieved a vertical bone gain of at least 5 mm. The mean radiographic vertical bone gain was 2.28 mm, whereas the mean histologic vertical bone gain was 3.16 mm. Histologically, all the implants were osseointegrated. The mean BIC for implants placed in new distracted bone was 34.78% ± 11.60% and 35.66% ± 8.84% for those placed in native bone. The mean peri-implant marginal bone level loss was 0.56 ± 0.54 mm.
CONCLUSION: It is possible to achieve vertical augmentation using intraosseous alveolar distractors to allow successful implantation of dental implants; however, the technique still requires surgical refinements and a dedicated training of the surgeons before being applied to humans.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four dogs had their posterior teeth removed, and sockets were left to heal for 20 weeks. The right and left sides of the posterior mandibles were randomly allocated, according to a split-mouth design, to receive either two distractors, distracting a 32-mm-long bone segment, or two distractors supporting one bony segment 20 mm long and one 8 mm long. Each side of the jaw was treated by a different operator. Eight days after placement, distractors were activated with one complete turn (corresponding to 0.75 mm of vertical distraction) per day for 8 days, followed by a latency period of 10 weeks. Distractors were removed, and seven dental implants of two randomly allocated designs were placed in each dog. Implants were submerged for 2 months, and the dogs were sacrificed. Outcome measures were: success of the augmentation procedure (defined as a vertical gain of at least 5 mm of bone), any complications, implant failure, bone-to-implant contact (BIC), and peri-implant marginal bone level changes.
RESULTS: One dog was withdrawn because of a mandible fracture. Eight complications occurred, and six osseodistractors were lost, but no implant failed. Only two segments in one dog achieved a vertical bone gain of at least 5 mm. The mean radiographic vertical bone gain was 2.28 mm, whereas the mean histologic vertical bone gain was 3.16 mm. Histologically, all the implants were osseointegrated. The mean BIC for implants placed in new distracted bone was 34.78% ± 11.60% and 35.66% ± 8.84% for those placed in native bone. The mean peri-implant marginal bone level loss was 0.56 ± 0.54 mm.
CONCLUSION: It is possible to achieve vertical augmentation using intraosseous alveolar distractors to allow successful implantation of dental implants; however, the technique still requires surgical refinements and a dedicated training of the surgeons before being applied to humans.