Implant rehabilitation of the posterior atrophic mandible with the sandwich osteotomy: outcome evaluation in a long-term follow-up

López-Cedrún, José Luís; Castro, María Pombo; López-Cedrún, M.; Búa, Jorge Arenaz; Carral, N.; Chavez, Victor Elias Arana; Luáces, R.; Vázquez, Isaura Pedreira

doi:10.1016/j.ijom.2013.07.611

Cited by 13 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There were five case reports including just one patient (8,9,16,19,22), and four case series including three to eighteen patients each (10,17,18,24). On the other side, the randomized clinical trials included six to thirty patients each (11-15,20,21,23).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The initial height over the mandibular nerve was 4-8mm in the majority of the cases (11-15,20), and the superior movement of the bone fragment also ranged between 4mm and 8mm (10,18,20,21,24). Xenografts were most often used (12-15,19,20,22) followed by autografts (10,11,16,17,20-24), usually harvested from the iliac crest or the retromolar triangle. In the vast majority of the studies, block grafts were chosen along with granules for filling the gaps of the osteotomy (9-13,14-17,19-24).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Segmental sandwich osteotomy of the posterior mandible in pre-implant surgery - A systematic review

Kamperos¹,

Zografos²,

Tzermpos³

et al. 2016

Med Oral

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe rehabilitation of the atrophic posterior mandible with dental implants often requires bone augmentation procedures. The aim of the present study is the systematic review of the literature concerning the success rate of Segmental Sandwich Osteotomy (SSO) of the posterior mandible in pre-implant surgery.Material and MethodsSystematic review of all clinical cases and clinical studies of SSO of the posterior mandible in pre-implant surgery with a minimum follow-up of 6 months after implant loading was performed, based on specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. The search strategy involved searching the electronic databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, COCHRANE LIBRARY, Clinical Trials (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and National Research Register (www.controlled-trials.com), supplemented by a manual search, in August 2015. In every study, the intervention characteristics and the outcome were recorded.ResultsOut of the 756 initial results, only 17 articles fulfilled the predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. They consisted of 9 retrospective case reports or series and 8 prospective randomized clinical trials. Overall, the studies included 174 patients. In these patients, 214 SSO augmentation procedures were performed in the posterior mandible and 444 implants were placed. The follow-up period after implant loading ranged between 8 months and 5.5 years. The success rate of SSO ranged between 90% and 100%. The implant survival during the follow-up period ranged between 90.9% and 100%.ConclusionsSegmental Sandwich Osteotomy should be considered as a well documented technique for the rehabilitation of the atrophic posterior mandible, with long-term postsurgical follow-up. The success rates are very high, as well as the survival of the dental implants placed in the augmented area. Key words:Segmental osteotomy, dental implant, mandible, inlay graft.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Segmental sandwich osteotomy of the posterior mandible in pre-implant surgery - A systematic review

Kamperos¹,

Zografos²,

Tzermpos³

et al. 2016

Med Oral

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A number of ridge augmentation methods of implant therapy have been reported, including guided bone regeneration (GBR) [46,47], maxillary sinus floor augmentation (MSFA) [48][49][50][51], vertical and/or lateral alveolar ridge augmentation [52][53][54][55], and distraction [56,57]. In the GBR method, barrier membrane with or without titanium reinforcement composed of expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (e-PTFE) is used [58].…”

Section: Hard Tissue Augmentation In Implant Therapymentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategies for alveolar ridge reconstruction and preservation for implant therapy

Masaki

Nakamoto

Mukaibo

et al. 2015

Journal of Prosthodontic Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…10 The IOM suggested that safety improvements should encompass three activities: preventing AEs, making AEs visible, and mitigating the effects of AEs. 10 However, the dental patient safety literature has mainly focused on managing risk, 11 exploring different approaches to improving specific surgical procedures, 12 or selection of dental products/materials. 13 In our previous work 14–16 we have proposed the adoption of The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Patient Safety Initiative which incorporates four major elements to address patient safety: (1) Identifying threats to patient safety; (2) Identifying and evaluating effective patient safety practices; (3) Educate, disseminate, implement, and raise awareness; and (4) Monitor threats to patient safety to ensure that a positive safety culture is maintained and a safe environment continues.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How dental team members describe adverse events

Maramaldi¹,

Walji²,

White³

et al. 2016

The Journal of the American Dental Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background There is increased recognition that patients suffer adverse events (AEs) or harm caused by treatments in dentistry, and little is known about how dental providers describe these events. Understanding how providers view AEs is essential to building a safer environment in dental practice. Methods Dental providers and domain experts were interviewed through focus groups and in-depth interviews and asked to identify the types of AEs that may occur in dental settings. Results The first order listing of the interview and focus group findings yielded 1,514 items that included both causes and AEs. 632 causes were coded into one of the eight categories of the Eindhoven classification. 882 AEs were coded into 12 categories of a newly developed dental AE classification. Inter-rater reliability was moderate among coders. The list was reanalyzed and duplicate items were removed leaving a total of 747 unique AEs and 540 causes. The most frequently identified AE types were “Aspiration/ingestion” at 14% (n=142), “Wrong-site, wrong-procedure, wrong-patient errors” at 13%, “Hard tissue damage” at 13%, and “Soft tissue damage” at 12%. Conclusions Dental providers identified a large and diverse list of AEs. These events ranged from “death due to cardiac arrest” to “jaw fatigue from lengthy procedures”. Practical Implications Identifying threats to patient safety is a key element of improving dental patient safety. An inventory of dental AEs underpins efforts to track, prevent, and mitigate these events.

show abstract

Implant rehabilitation of the posterior atrophic mandible with the sandwich osteotomy: outcome evaluation in a long-term follow-up

Cited by 13 publications

References 0 publications

Segmental sandwich osteotomy of the posterior mandible in pre-implant surgery - A systematic review

Segmental sandwich osteotomy of the posterior mandible in pre-implant surgery - A systematic review

Strategies for alveolar ridge reconstruction and preservation for implant therapy

How dental team members describe adverse events

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About