Clinical evaluation of implant-supported prostheses for edentulous patients with ectodermal dysplasia / 口腔疾病防治

Objective@#The aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of implant-supported prostheses for oral function rehabilitation in patients with ectodermal dysplasia.@*Methods @#Thirteen patients were included in the present study. After bone augmentation, zygomatic implants (ZIs) or regular implants (RIs) were placed, fabrication of dental prostheses were applied, and psychological and oral education was carried out. Implant survival rates, patient satisfaction and other related evaluation indicators were assessed. @*Results@#The ilium was chosen for autogenic bone grafts in two patients. The fibula was used in two other patients and the mandibular ramus in one other patient. One patient was treated through alveolar distraction osteogenesis of the mandible. Guided bone regeneration was applied in seven other patients. Bone graft resorption in the maxilla was observed in one patient; bone augmentation of the mandible was successful in all patients, and no obvious bone resorption was observed. One hundred and eighteen implants were placed, among which 22 were ZIs, and 96 were RIs. Five RIs failed and were removed. The survival rate for ZIs was 100%, and the survival rate for RIs was 94.79%, in a follow up after 3 years. All patients were satisfied with the restoration of their oral function. More than 50% of the patients exhibited self-confidence.@*Conclusion@# Oral function can be restored in edentulous ectodermal dysplasia patients using bone augmentation and implant-supported prostheses, and patient self-confidence can be enhanced. However, the resorption of grafted bone in the anterior region of the maxilla cannot be ignored.

Distraction Osteogenesis Followed by Implant Installation on the Reconstructed Mandible with a Free Iliac Bone Graft in a OdontogenicMandibular Myxoma Patient: Case Report

A case report of implant placement in distraction-augmented alveolar bone of the mandible

Comparative histomorphologic study of regenerated bone for dental implant placement in the atrophied posterior maxilla

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the regenerative capacity of reconstruction in the atrophied posterior maxilla by comparing bone graft procedures and alveolar distraction osteogenesis (ADO) techniques. We performed the autogenous iliac bone graft (AGB group, 5 specimens in 3 patients), and the combination (Mixed group, 3 specimens in 3 patients) of the autogenous and deproteinized bovine bone (Bio-Oss(R), Geistlich Co., Switzerland) as the ratio of 2:1 in the sinus floor elevation procedures. ADO procedures using TRACK(R). (KLS Martin Co., Germany) were also performed to augment vertical alveolar height in atrophied posterior maxilla (ADO group, 5 specimens in 4 patients). Newly generated bone tissues were obtained with the 2.0mm diameter trephine bur (3i Co., USA) during implant fixture installation after 5-7 months. Routine histolomorphological observation, immunodot blot assay for quantitative evaluation, and immunohistochemical staining with antibodies to MMP-1, -9, -10, TIMP-1, -2, and BMP-2, -4 were all carried out. Lamellar bone formation was well shown in all specimens and new bone formations of ADO group increased than those of other procedures. In immunohistochemical staining, the strong expression of BMP-2 was shown in all specimens, and immunodot blot assay showed that bone formation is accompanied by the good induction of factors associated with angiogenesis and appeared more increased amount of osteogenic and angiogenic factors in ADO group. ADO is the most effective technique for new bone formation compared to sinus floor elevation with autogenous or mixed bone graft in the atrophied posterior maxilla. In the quantitative immunodot blot assay, the regenerated bone after ADO showed more increased products of VEGF, BMP-2, PCNA and MMP-1 than those after the other procedures, and these findings were able to be confirmed by immunohistochemical stainings.

Implant-supported prosthesis placed in the distraction-augmented alveolar bones: review of 2 cases