Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology · 2012
Results of oral implant-supported prostheses after mandibular vertical alveolar ridge distraction: a propos of 54 sites.
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.
Zwetyenga Narcisse, Vidal Nicolas, Ella Bruno, Siberchicot François, Emparanza Angel
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to present retrospective long-term results of oral implant-supported prostheses after mandibular vertical alveolar ridge distraction.
STUDY DESIGN: Patients who had alveolar mandibular distraction before oral rehabilitation from 1999 to 2009 were retrospectively reviewed.
RESULTS: Fifty-four distractions were performed in 25 women and 12 men with a mean age of 51.7 years. Seventeen patients had bilateral distraction. Most of the distracted sites were posterior. Global major complications were major misdirection (3.7%), fracture (3.7%), and permanent alveolar nerve paresthesia (1 patient). All of the patients experienced osseous improvement. Mean height of the distraction was 11.7 mm. A total of 127 implants were inserted with survival and success rates, respectively, of 100% and 96.2% (mean follow-up of 62 months). All of the patients had satisfactory oral rehabilitation.
CONCLUSIONS: Mandibular alveolar vertical distraction could be a reliable and effective procedure with precise indications. A less complicated implant distractor may simplify the procedure.
STUDY DESIGN: Patients who had alveolar mandibular distraction before oral rehabilitation from 1999 to 2009 were retrospectively reviewed.
RESULTS: Fifty-four distractions were performed in 25 women and 12 men with a mean age of 51.7 years. Seventeen patients had bilateral distraction. Most of the distracted sites were posterior. Global major complications were major misdirection (3.7%), fracture (3.7%), and permanent alveolar nerve paresthesia (1 patient). All of the patients experienced osseous improvement. Mean height of the distraction was 11.7 mm. A total of 127 implants were inserted with survival and success rates, respectively, of 100% and 96.2% (mean follow-up of 62 months). All of the patients had satisfactory oral rehabilitation.
CONCLUSIONS: Mandibular alveolar vertical distraction could be a reliable and effective procedure with precise indications. A less complicated implant distractor may simplify the procedure.