Secondary alveolar bone grafting: Radiographic and clinical evaluation

Sharma, Saurabh; Rao, JK Dayashankara; Majumder, Kaberi; Jain, Harsha

doi:10.4103/2231-0746.95316

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The frequency of canines impaction in patients with CL/P is determined in the literature as between 0% and 58% [3,[16][17][18][19][20]. Lower frequency of impaction was observed in the groups above 50 persons (0-35%), while the results up to 58% were obtained in the groups with less than 50 patients [21][22][23][24]. It may indicate the higher success of specialist care in multidisciplinary centers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Frequency of Additional Congenital Dental Anomalies in Children with Cleft Lip, Alveolar and Palate

Pastuszak

Dunin-Wilczyńska

Lasota

2020

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the study was to assess the risk of incidence of additional congenital dental anomalies in children with nonsyndromic cleft lip, alveolar and/without palate (CL/P). Hypodontia, hyperdontia and canines impaction was recognized. From patients with CL/P treated at the Clinic of Congenital Facial Deformities in Chair and Department of Jaw Orthopedics Medical University of Lublin, 56 subjects were randomly selected. On the panoramic radiographs taken at the age of 8–12 years, the angle of upper unerupted canines was measured using Westerlund’s recommendations. The supernumerary teeth and hypodontia were checked. The procedures: maxillary expansion, secondary alveolar bone graft (SABG) and extraction of primary canines were noted. The frequency of canines impaction was 5.36%. Hypodontia was found in 37.5% of patients; hyperdontia was present in 23.21% of patients. No influence of procedures (expansion of the maxilla, SABG, deciduous canines extraction) on permanent maxillary canine eruption was proved. Patients with CL/P are exposed to the unfavorable position of unerupted maxillary canines most frequently in the cleft area of complete cleft. Maxillary lateral incisor on the cleft side is most frequently affected with congenital anomaly. Hypodontia and hyperdontia do not influence maxillary canine impaction. Good clinical result was achieved with an applied approach, which should be widely introduced.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Frequency of Additional Congenital Dental Anomalies in Children with Cleft Lip, Alveolar and Palate

Pastuszak

Dunin-Wilczyńska

Lasota

2020

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The study by Schultze-Mosgau et al 42 reported a 86% success rate and for the Kawakami et al's 43 study, the success rate of bone graft was reported to be 59% 1 year after surgery. The Kawakami et al's study showed a lower rate of bone graft success than similar studies like the study by Sharma et al, 37 which evaluated the secondary alveolar bone grafting radiographically and clinically. In this study, 10 patients who underwent secondary alveolar bone grafting for different types of cleft palate treated with autologous cranial graft were evaluated.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…Many studies have been performed to evaluate the success rate of alveolar bone grafting in patients with cleft lip and palate based on clinical or radiographical scales, reporting mixed results 12,32–38 . However, only few studies have investigated the long-term stability of alveolar bone grafts 34,39 .…”

Section: Evaluation Of Alveolar Bone Graft Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…31 Many studies have been performed to evaluate the success rate of alveolar bone grafting in patients with cleft lip and palate based on clinical or radiographical scales, reporting mixed results. 12,[32][33][34][35][36][37][38] However, only few studies have investigated the long-term stability of alveolar bone grafts. 34,39 The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature that examined the long-term stability of alveolar bone grafting in patients with cleft lip and palate.…”

Section: Source Of Bone Graft Materials and Their Substitutesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Long-Term Stability of Alveolar Bone Graft in Cleft Lip and Palate Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Jahanbin

Kamyabnezhad

Raisolsadat

et al. 2021

Journal of Craniofacial Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

However, only the lower midfacial area can be advanced, and it is impossible to resolve the overall midface deficiency due to the position of the Le Fort I osteotomy line. 5,9 Thus, facial implant placement can be considered because the upper-midface deficiency cannot be resolved through Le Fort I osteotomy.Various types of prosthesis, including silicone (polydimethylsiloxane), GoreTex (expanded polytetrafluorethylene, WL Gore & Associates Inc, Flagstaff, AZ), and MedPor (high-density porous polyethylene, Porex Industries, Fairburn, GA), have been used to alleviate facial depression. Since these prostheses are supplied by sizes, premanufactured prostheses of an appropriate size should be selected during the surgery and need to be carved before placing them. Consequentially, the prostheses are not passively fitted on the bone surface, and the gap is formed, leading to a risk of prothesis migration to an unwanted area. Also, since prostheses are often placed based on the surgeon's tactile sense and experiences, there are possibilities of malpositioning or under-/overcorrection. 10

show abstract

“…Success or failure of bone grafting has been reported in relation to case number, clinical outcomes, contributing factors, and other domains (Amanat and Langdon, 1991; Frank, 2006; Lilja, 2009). Factors such as age, gender, stage of tooth eruption, cleft side, and cleft size or volume are variables shown to be related to success or failure of SABG (Enemark et al, 1988; Newlands, 2000; Dayashankara Rao et al, 2012; Santiago et al, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cleft Size and Success of Secondary Alveolar Bone Grafting—A Systematic Review

Chetpakdeechit

Pisek

Pitiphat

et al. 2021

The Cleft Palate Craniofacial Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective This study aimed to review all research evidence of presurgical cleft size and related factors to success of secondary alveolar bone grafting (SABG). Design and Setting The systematic review searched the OVID-Medline®, PubMed®, Embase®, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) up to August 2020. Two reviewers independently selected potential abstracts for full review. Disagreeements were resolved by consensus. The first author extracted data and assessed the risk of bias using Risk of Bias in Non-randomized studies—of Interventions tool. Patients and Interventions Patients with non-syndromic clefts who received SABG were selected. Presurgical cleft size/volume and treatment results must be available. Main Outcome Measures Level of the grafted bone, achievement of orthodontic tooth movement into the grafted area, need for re-operation. Results From 962 abstracts, 23 publications were included. Mean cleft width was 6.80 ± 1.98 mm, cleft area 20–240 mm2, and mean volume 0.89 ± 0.33 cm3. No definite conclusion was achieved on whether a narrow or wide cleft showed better treatment outcomes, but other potentially related factors were good oral hygiene and eruptive force of the maxillary canines. Lack of a standard definition of cleft size, a small sample size, varying outcome parameters, and moderate-to-high risk of bias contributed to the summary. A meta-analysis could not be performed because of the heterogeneity. Conclusion Due to insufficient evidence, cleft width/volume could not be specified leading to more successful SABG. Care of patients could be improved in both research by following rigorous methodology, and practice by clear communication.

show abstract

Secondary alveolar bone grafting: Radiographic and clinical evaluation

Cited by 7 publications

References 16 publications

Frequency of Additional Congenital Dental Anomalies in Children with Cleft Lip, Alveolar and Palate

Frequency of Additional Congenital Dental Anomalies in Children with Cleft Lip, Alveolar and Palate

Long-Term Stability of Alveolar Bone Graft in Cleft Lip and Palate Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Cleft Size and Success of Secondary Alveolar Bone Grafting—A Systematic Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About