Mund-, Kiefer- und Gesichtschirurgie : MKG · 2006
[Bidirectional and unidirectional distraction of defects of the alveolar process comparative clinical study].
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Schleier P, Siebert H G, Wolf Ch, Berndt A, Schumann D
Аннотация
AIM: The purpose of the retrospective study was to compare bidirectional distraction osteogenesis with the currently used unidirectional method of alveolar ridge distraction with regard to bone height attained and complications.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Overall 21 patients were treated by distraction osteogenesis for localized defects of the alveolar ridge. Vertical augmentation of the mandible and maxilla was performed using 10 unidirectional (group A) and 12 bidirectional (group B) devices. The effect of therapy was evaluated by height of bone gain and observed complications.
RESULTS: The average gain of vertical bone height was approximately 6 mm. No statistically significant differences occurred between the two treatment groups (p=0.09). For the entire study two complications were observed: beside breakage of a distractor device (unidirectional distraction) an infection during the retention time (bidirectional distraction) developed.
CONCLUSIONS: It could be shown that osteodistraction is a potentially valuable therapy for the correction of alveolar defects. We observed complications in both groups. No statistical differences were noted in regard to gained bone height and complications between the two groups.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Overall 21 patients were treated by distraction osteogenesis for localized defects of the alveolar ridge. Vertical augmentation of the mandible and maxilla was performed using 10 unidirectional (group A) and 12 bidirectional (group B) devices. The effect of therapy was evaluated by height of bone gain and observed complications.
RESULTS: The average gain of vertical bone height was approximately 6 mm. No statistically significant differences occurred between the two treatment groups (p=0.09). For the entire study two complications were observed: beside breakage of a distractor device (unidirectional distraction) an infection during the retention time (bidirectional distraction) developed.
CONCLUSIONS: It could be shown that osteodistraction is a potentially valuable therapy for the correction of alveolar defects. We observed complications in both groups. No statistical differences were noted in regard to gained bone height and complications between the two groups.