BackgroundTo develop a systematic review by assessing and comparing the different complications that occurs in bone graft surgery using the mandibular body, ramus and symphysis as donor sites.Material and MethodsIn order to respond to the following question, a systematic review was developed: does the use of intraoral mandibular body and ramus as donor sites in bone graft surgery, produce fewer and less severe complications in comparison to the use of the mandibular symphysis in patients that present bone resorption that needs augmentation using autologous grafts? The review was carried out between January 1990 and 2015, during which only clinical essays with a minimum follow-up period of six months were included.ResultsThe initial search yielded a total of 2912 articles, of which 6 were finally selected. In total, 259 graft surgeries were performed; 118 using the mandibular body and ramus as donor sites, and 141, the symphysis. The most frequent complications that arose when using the mandibular symphysis were temporary sensory alterations in the anterior teeth (33.87%), followed by sensory alterations of the skin and mucosa (18.57%). As for the mandibular body and ramus donor sites, the most frequent complications relate to temporary sensory alterations of the mucosa (8.19%) and to minor postoperative bleeding (6.55%).ConclusionsThe analyzed results show a higher prevalence and severity of complications when using mandibular symphysis bone grafts, producing more discomfort for the patient. Therefore, it would be advisable to perform further clinical essays due to the lack of studies found. Key words:Alveolar ridge augmentation, autogenous bone, mandibular bone grafts, chin, mandibular symphysis, mandibular ramus.

BackgroundThe survival of dental implants has been linked to primary stability. The aim of this study is to analyse the factors that influence the survival of dental implants placed without primary stability.Material and MethodsA cohort study of implants placed without primary stability was carried out between September 2011 and July 2016. All cases with registered information on the patient and surgical intervention were used. Cases that did not have a 12-month follow-up after implant placement were excluded.ResultsOut of 2,400 analysed implants, 92 were placed without primary stability. The absence of primary stability was classified as B in 49 cases, C in 38 cases and D in 5 cases. No statistically significant influence of the patient’s age, primary stability, brand, or implant size in terms of implant survival was established. A tendency towards greater early implant loss was observed in implants whose absence of primary stability was classified as C.ConclusionsPoor primary stability is not statistically significant in the loss of dental implants of the characteristics studied. Any of the factors studied are related with early implant loss as a main factor. Key words:Primary stability, survival, dental implants.

BackgroundProvide a review of alternative intraoral donor sites to the chin and body-ramus of the mandible that bring fewer complications and that may be used to regenerate small and medium defects.Material and MethodsA review was conducted using the search engine PUBMED and looking manually into scientific journals.ResultsFrom the 35 articles included, 6 corresponded to the coronoids, 3 corresponded to the zygomatic body, 5 corresponded to the anterior maxillary sinus wall, 3 corresponded to the zygomatic alveolar process, 2 corresponded to the incisive fossa, 2 corresponded to the anterior nasal spine, 2 corresponded to the palatal region, 5 corresponded to the tuberosity, and 7 corresponded to the palatal and mandibular tori.ConclusionsAlthough there are few complications described when using alternative intraoral donor sites, the main problem with these types of grafts is their scarce bone volume, with only the zygomatic body, anterior sinus wall, and palate sites being able to be used in medium defects. More clinical trials are necessary in order to evaluate the behavior of the alternative donor sites over time. Key words:Grafting, autologous bone, autografts, mandible, maxilla, palate hard, zygoma.

No abstract

BackgroundTo review the literature that analyses the types and frequency of complications associated with the use of extraosseous alveolar distraction from 2007 to 2013.Material and MethodsReview of the literature in PubMed, using these keywords; alveolar ridge, alveolar distraction osteogenesis, complication, literature review. Inclusion criteria were: articles published between 2007 and 2013 that included the distraction protocol, the complications encountered and the time when they occurred.ResultsAccording to the above criteria, 12 articles were included in this review, where 334 extraosseous distractors were placed and 395 complications were encountered, of which 19 (4.81%) were intraoperative, 261 (66.07%) postoperative and 115 (29.11 %) were postdistraction. The most common complication was the incorrect distraction vector found in 105 cases (26.58%), in 23 cases (5.82%) there were severe complications, of which 14 (3.54%) were mandibular fracture and 9 (2.27%) were fractures of the distractor elements.ConclusionsAccording to this review, although alveolar distraction is a safe and predictable technique, it can cause complications; however, they are usually minor and easily resolved without affecting the treatment outcome. Key words: Alveolar ridge, alveolar distraction osteogenesis, complication, literature review.