 |
Publisher: Peytchinski Publishing
ISSN: 1312-773X (Online)
Issue: 2018, vol. 24, issue1
Subject Area: Dental Medicine
-
DOI: 10.5272/jimab.2018241.1909
Published online: 28 February 2018
Original article
J of IMAB. 2018 Jan-Mar;24(1):1909-1913
PREOPERATIVE CBCT ASSESSMENT OF DONOR SITE- SYMPHYSIS AND RAMUS BUCCAL SHELF FOR ALVEOLAR RIDGE AUGMENTATION
Hristo Stoyanov
, Elitsa Deliverska 
,
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Medical University – Sofia, Bulgaria.
ABSTRACT:
Introduction: Mandibular block autografts have been used extensively for alveolar ridge augmentation with great success and include the symphysis and ramus buccal shelf as donor sites.
Objectives: Purpose of our study is to analyze preoperative CBCT assessment of donor sites- (symphysis and ramus buccal shelf) for ranges of autogenous block graft.
Material and Methods: In our study, we have analyzed with CBCT these donor sites in 15 patients and were determined the osteotomy lines of the graft depends on the limiting anatomical critical structures. Also according to CBCT with 3D printing could be done stereolithographic models and 3D cutting models for optimizing surgery.
Results: Symphysis can provide a range of dense cortical cancellous bone ranging from 17,7/7,65/6,68 mm, in contrast to a typical ramus buccal shelf block graft that is 9/9,2/8,1 mm. In symphisis area, there were observed a significant difference in width of the block at the level of the second incisor and canine. Also, the thickness of the graft differs in cranial and in caudal position. About bone graft from the buccal shell of mandibular ramus, thickness decreases from cranial to caudal direction as the measurement is at about 8mm. The width of the block is bigger in a cranial direction and smaller at the half level of its height.
Conclusion: Preoperative assessment of donor site is essential for the success of the procedure. These grafts can be used for predictable horizontal augmentation of 5 to 7 mm and vertical augmentation of up to and including 6 mm.
Keywords: autograft, block graft, donor sites, mandible, augmentation,
- Download FULL TEXT /PDF 1014 KB/
Please cite this article in PubMed Style or AMA (American Medical Association) Style:
Stoyanov H, Deliverska E. Preoperative CBCT Assessment of Donor Site- Symphysis and Ramus Buccal Shelf for Alveolar Ridge Augmentation. J of IMAB. 2018 Jan-Mar;24(1):1909-1913.
DOI: 10.5272/jimab.2018241.1909
Correspondence to: Elitsa Georgieva Deliverska, Assoc. Prof., Department of Oral and Maxillofacial surgery, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Medical University Sofia; 1, Georgi Sofiiski Blvd., 1431 Sofia, Bulgaria; E-mail: elitsadeliverska@yahoo.com
REFERENCES:
1. Jensen OT, Piko MA, Simion M, Vercellotti T. Bone Grafting Strategies for Vertical Alveolar Augmentation. In: Peterson’s principles of Oral and maxillofacial surgery. Miloro M, Ghali GE, Larsen PE, Waite P. (editors). 2-nd ed. 2004; vol.1, part 2, chapter 12:223-234. [Internet]
2. Misch CM. Comparison of intraoral donor sites for onlay grafting prior to implant placement. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1997 Nov-Dec;12(6):767-76. [PubMed]
3. Clavero J, Lundgren S. Ramus or chin grafts for maxillary sinus inlay and local onlay augmentation: comparison of donor site morbidity and complications. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2003 Oct;5(3):154-60. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
4. Sakkas A, Wilde F, Heufelder M, Winter K, Schramm A. Autogenous bone grafts in oral implantology-is it still a "gold standard"? A consecutive review of 279 patients with 456 clinical procedures. Int J Implant Dent. 2017 Dec;3(1):23. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
5. Gungormus M, Yavuz MS. The ascending ramus of the mandible as a donor site in maxillofacial bone grafting. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2002 Nov;60(11):1316-8. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
6. Koole R, Visser WJ, Klein WR, Suiker AM. A comparative investigation on autologous mandibular and iliac crest bone grafts. An experimental study in sheep. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 1991 May;19(4):133-43. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
7. Linkow LI. Bone transplants using the symphysis, the iliac crest and synthetic bone materials. J Oral Implant. 1983; 11:211-247.
8. Misch, CM. Use of the mandibular ramus as a donor site for onlay bone grafting. J Oral Implant. 2000; 16(1):42-49
9. Sindet-Pedersen S, Enemark H. Reconstruction of alveolar clefts with mandibular or iliac crest bone grafts: a comparative study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1990 Jun;48(6):554-8. [PubMed]
10. Toscano N, Shumaker N, Holtzclaw D. The art of block grafting. A review of the surgical protocol for reconstruction of alveolar ridge deficiency. J Implant Adv Clin Dent. 2010; 2(2):45-66.
11. Verdugo F, Simonian K, Frydman A, D'Addona A, Pontуn J. Long-term block graft stability in thin periodontal biotype patients: a clinical and tomographic study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011 Mar-Apr;26(2):325-32. [PubMed]
12. Vincente J, Stoelinga PJW. Use of bone grafts from the mandibular body in pre-implant surgery. Ned Tijdschrift Tandheelkd. 2005; 112:211–215.
13. Smith BR, Rajchel JL. II. Anatomic considerations in mandibular ramus osteotomies. In: Bell WH, ed. Modern practice in orthognathic and reconstructive surgery. Philadelphia: WB Saunders. 1992:2347-2360.
14. Rajchel J, Ellis E 3rd, Fonseca RJ. The anatomical location of the mandibular canal: its relationship to the sagittal ramus osteotomy. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 1986 Winter;1(1):37-47. [PubMed]
15. Jensen AT, Jensen SS, Worsaae N. Complications related to bone augmentation procedures of localized defects in the alveolar ridge. A retrospective clinical study. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016 Jun;20(2):115-22. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
16. Nkenke E, Neukam FW. Autogenous bone harvesting and grafting in advanced jaw resorption: morbidity, resorption and implant survival. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2014 Summer;7 Suppl 2:S203-17. [PubMed]
17. Kuchler U, von Arx T. Horizontal ridge augmentation in conjunction with or prior to implant placement in the anterior maxilla: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014; 29 Suppl:14-24. [PubMed]
18. Cordaro L, Torsello F, Miuccio MT, di Torresanto VM, Eliopoulos D. Mandibular bone harvesting for alveolar reconstruction and implant placement: subjective and objective cross-sectional evaluation of donor and recipient site up to 4 years. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011 Nov;22(11):1320-6. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
19. Sbordone C, Toti P, Guidetti F, Califano L, Pannone G, Sbordone L. Volumetric changes after sinus augmentation using blocks of autogenous iliac bone or freeze-dried allogeneic bone. A non-randomized study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2014 Mar;42(2):113-8. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
20. Jensen SS, Terheyden H. Bone augmentation procedures in localized defects in the alveolar ridge: clinical results with different bone grafts and bone-substitute materials. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009; 24 Suppl:218-36. [PubMed]
21. Peterson's Principles of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 2-nd edition. Editors: Miloro M, Ghali GE, Larsen PE, Waite PD, Larry J. Peterson LJ. B C Decker. 2004; p.223-235.
Received: 12 October 2017
Published online: 28 February 2018