Onley blok greftleme sonrası kazanılan kemik miktarının dental volumetrik tomografi ile değerlendirilmesi
Amaç: Çalışmamızda ramus veya simfizden alınan blok greftlerle kazanılan kemik miktarlarının değerlendirilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Horizontal veya kombine alveolar defekti bulunan 15 hastanın radyolojik görüntüleri restrospektif olarak incelenmiştir. Defektler ramus veya simfiz bölgesinden alınan otojen blok greftlerle ogmente edilmiştir. Pre-op ve post-op 6. ayda alınan dental volumetrik tomografi (DVT) görüntüleri ile kazanılan kemik miktarları değerlendirilmiştir. Sonuçlar Wilcoxon, Mann Whitney U ve Pearson Korelasyon testleri ile değerlendirilmiştir (p
The evaluation of acquired bone volume with onlay block grafting by dental volumetric tomography
Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the acquired bone volume obtained from ramus or symphysis block grafts. Materials and Method:This retrospective study was conducted on 15 patients with horizontal or combined alveolar bone defects. They were treated by autogenous bone blocks harvested from the ramus or symphysis. Bone volumes were measured pre-op and post-op 6th month by dental volumetric tomography images respectively. The results were analyzed by Wilcoxon, Mann Whitney U and Pearson Correlation tests (p
___
- 1. Chiapasco M, Zaniboni M, Boisco M. Augmentation
procedures for the rehabilitation of deficient edentulous
ridges with oral implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006; 17:
136-159.
- 2. Dolanmaz D, Esen A, Yıldırım G, İnan Ö. The use of au
togeneous mandibular bone block grafts for reconstruction
of alveolar defects. Ann Maxillofac Surg 2015; 5:71-
76.
- 3. Bernstein S, Cooke J, Fotek P, Wang HL. Vertical bone
augmentation: Where are we now? Implant Dent. 2006;
15:218-219.
- 4. Idrontino G, Valente NA. Intraoral and extraoral autologous
bone block graft techniques: A review of the recent
literature. Int J Contemp Dent Med Rev. vol. 2016; Article
ID: 030316, 2016. doi 10.15713/ins.ijcdmr.99.
- 5. Misch CM. Comparison of intraoral donor sites for onlay
grafting prior to implant placement. Int J Oral Maxillofac
Implants 1997; 12: 767-776.
- 6. Misch CE, Dietsh F. Bone-grafting materials in implant
dentistry. Implant Dent 1993; 2:`158-167.
- 7. Marx RE. Clinical application of bone biology to mandibular
and maxillary reconstruction. Clin Plast Surg 1994;
21: 377-392.
- 8. Fakhry A. The mandibular retromolar area as a donor
site in maxillofacial bone grafting : surgical notes. Int J
Periodontics Restorative Dent 2011; 31: 275-283.
- 9. Acocella A, Bertolai R, Colafranceschi M, Sacco R. Clinical,
histological and histomorphometric evaluation of
the healing of mandibular ramus bone block grafts for
alveolar ridge augmentation before implant placement.
J Cranio-Maxillofacial Surg 2010; 38: 222-230.
- 10. Raghoebar GM, Meijndert L, Kalk WWI, Vissink A.
Morbidity of mandibular bone harvesting: a comparative
study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 2007; 22: 359-365.
- 11. Gapski R, Wang HL, Misch CE. Management of incision
design in symphysis graft procedures: a review of the
literature. J Oral Implantol 2001; 27: 134-142.
- 12. Cranin AN, Katzap M, Demirdjan E, Ley J. Autogenous
bone ridge augmentation using the mandibular symphysis
as a donor. J Oral Implantol 2004; 27: 43-47.
- 13. Sennerby L, Janson T, Warfvinge J, Carlsson G-E,
Bergman B. Mandibular bone resorption in patients treated
with tissue-integrated prostheses and in denture wearers.
Prelim Manuscr 1988; 46: 135-140.
- 14. Siebert JW, Angrigiani C, McCarthy JG, Longaker
MT. Blood supply of the Le Fort I maxillary segment: an
anatomic study. Plast Reconstr Surg 1997; 100: 843-851.
- 15. Dilek O, Tezulas E, Dincel M. Required minimum primary
stability and torque values for immediate loading of
mini dental implants: an experimental study in nonviable
bovine femoral bone. Oral Surgery, Oral Med Oral Pathol
Oral Radiol Endodont 2008; 105: 20-27.
- 16. Winkler S, Morris HF, Ochi S. Implant survival to 36
months as related to length and diameter. Ann Periodontol.
2000; 5: 22-31.
- 17. Li T, Hu K, Cheng L, Ding Y, Ding Y, Shao J, Kong L.
Optimum selection of the dental implant diameter and
length in the posterior mandible with poor bone quality –
A 3D finite element analysis. Appl Math Modelling 2011;
35: 446-456.