1998
DOI: 10.1016/s1010-5182(98)80075-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Miniplate osteosynthesis for fractures of the edentulous mandible: A clinical study 1989–96

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
22
0
1

Year Published

2003
2003
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 49 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
22
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Iatrou et al [5] and Mugino et al [3] reported series of cases demonstrating reasonable treatment outcomes using miniplate osteosynthesis on fractures of edentulous mandibles, despite the fact that not all mandibles were atrophic as defined by Luhr et al [6]. Nevertheless, their principles of treatment were based on bone buttressing areas of the mandible for placement of the plates.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Iatrou et al [5] and Mugino et al [3] reported series of cases demonstrating reasonable treatment outcomes using miniplate osteosynthesis on fractures of edentulous mandibles, despite the fact that not all mandibles were atrophic as defined by Luhr et al [6]. Nevertheless, their principles of treatment were based on bone buttressing areas of the mandible for placement of the plates.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Important advantages cited throughout the literature in favor of the use of smaller bone plates include: possibility of surgery under local anesthesia and sedation, less invasive surgical procedure and avoidance of a scar and facial nerve lesion due to the use of an intra-oral access [3][4][5].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Treatment of fractures in older patients with bone atrophy is characterized by high morbidity due to local and general factors (Ellis and Price, 2008). In fact, serious complications are common, especially in patients with atrophy classes II and III, such as non-union or fracture of hardware, the incidence of which has been reported to range between 4% and 20% (Luhr et al, 1996;Bruce and Strachan, 1976;Buchbinder, 1993;Eyrich et al, 1997;Iatrou et al, 1998;Kunz et al, 2001) and is probably linked to the bone height in the area of fractures (Bruce and Ellis, 1993;Wittwer et al, 2006).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%