Expert consensus on the bone augmentation surgery for alveolar bone defects / 口腔疾病防治

@#Alveolar bone is an important anatomic basis for implant-supported denture restoration, and its different degrees of defects determine the choices of bone augmentation surgeries. Therefore, the reconstruction of alveolar bone defects is an important technology in the clinical practice of implant restoration. However, the final reconstructive effect of bone quality, bone quantity and bone morphology is affected by many factors. Clinicians need to master the standardized diagnosis and treatment principles and methods to improve the treatment effect and achieve the goal of both aesthetic and functional reconstruction of both jaws. Based on the current clinical experience of domestic experts and the relevant academic guidelines of foreign counterparts, this expert consensus systematically and comprehensively summarized the augmentation strategies of alveolar bone defects from two aspects: the classification of alveolar bone defects and the appropriate selection of bone augmentation surgeries. The following consensus are reached: alveolar bone defects can be divided into five types (Ⅰ-0, Ⅰ-Ⅰ, Ⅱ-0, Ⅱ-Ⅰ and Ⅱ-Ⅱ) according to the relationship between alveolar bone defects and the expected position of dental implants. A typeⅠ-0 bone defect is a bone defect on one side of the alveolar bone that does not exceed 50% of the expected implant length, and there is no obvious defect on the other side; guided bone regeneration with simultaneous implant implantation is preferred. Type Ⅰ-Ⅰ bone defects refer to bone defects on both sides of alveolar bone those do not exceed 50% of the expected implant length; the first choice is autologous bone block onlay grafting for bone increments with staged implant placement or transcrestal sinus floor elevation with simultaneous implant implantation. Type Ⅱ-0 bone defects show that the bone defect on one side of alveolar bone exceeds 50% of the expected implant length, and there’s no obvious defect on the other side; autologous bone block onlay grafting (thickness ≤ 4 mm) or alveolar ridge splitting (thickness > 4 mm) is preferred for bone augmentation with staged implant placement. Type Ⅱ-Ⅰ bone defects indicate that the bone plate defect on one side exceeds 50% of the expected implant length and the bone defect on the other side does not exceed 50% of the expected implant length; autologous bone block onlay grafting or tenting techniques is preferred for bone increments with staged implant implantation. Type Ⅱ-Ⅱ bone defects are bone plates on both sides of alveolar bone those exceed 50% of the expected implant length; guided bone regeneration with rigid mesh or maxillary sinus floor elevation or cortical autologous bone tenting is preferred for bone increments with staged implant implantation. This consensus will provide clinical physicians with appropriate augmentation strategies for alveolar bone defects.

Avaliação da quantidade e qualidade óssea de crianças através de ultra-som quantitativo - um estudo piloto / Evaluation of the quantity and quality of children's bones by means of quantitative ultrasound - a pilot study

Este estudo objetivou avaliar a quantidade e qualidade óssea em escolares através de ultra-som qualitativo e relacionar com idade e variáveis de crescimento. Trata-se de um estudo exploratório, transversal, com 99 escolares, entre seis e dez anos de idade, sendo 52 meninos e 47 meninas. As variáveis de peso corporal, estatura e dobras cutâneas foram mensuradas e, posteriormente, calculou-se o IMC. O percentual de gordura corporal, peso gordo e peso magro foram estimados por um analisador de bioimpedância. A quantidade óssea (ADSoS) (m/s) e a qualidade óssea (UBPI) foram avaliadas pelo equipamento DBM Sonic BP-01. Utilizou-se a estatística descritiva, o teste t Student para amostras independentes e a correlação de Pearson. Não foram encontradas diferenças significativas entre meninos e meninas para: idade, peso, estatura e IMC. As meninas apresentaram valores superiores e estatisticamente significativos para a soma de quatro e duas dobras cutâneas, %G e peso gordo. A quantidade e a qualidade óssea aumentaram progressivamente com a idade, em ambos os sexos, com diferenças significativas e superiores para o feminino. As correlações entre AD-SoS e idade, peso, estatura e peso magro, foram moderadas e baixas para meninos, e baixas para as meninas. Como conclusões, os meninos apresentaram valores inferiores de tecido adiposo e superiores de reserva protéica em relação às meninas. As meninas apresentaram melhor quantidade óssea, no entanto a qualidade óssea foi similar para ambos os sexos. A tecnologia QUS mostrou a habilidade para medir mudanças na estrutura e crescimento ósseo.

The distribution of xive implant patients and the type of implant site and survival rate in mandible / 대한치주과학회지

This study is an analysis of distribution of patients who installed Xive implant in Yonsei University Hospital and types of implant site for about 2 years recall check and cumulative survival rate. 41 implant were used in this study. It shows the conclusion below. 1. Patients at the age of 40s and 50s were 60% of all implant cases and average number of implant was 2.4(man), and 1.9(woman). All cases were operated on mandible, 3 implants on anterior region and 38 implants on posterior region. 2. The major cause of tooth loss is dental caries(48.8%), followed by periodontal disease. 3. Most distribution of bone qaulity for mandibular implant site was type II(65.8%) and bone quantity was type B(75.6%). 4. The majority of implants were those of 11, 13mm in length(95%) and regular diameter in width(64%). 5. The 41(19 persons) Xive implants that were placed in the mandibular anterior and posterior region were all survival and showed a 100% 2 year cumulative survival rate. The results provided us with basic data on patient type, implant distribution, bone condi- tion, and survival rate. We wish that our results coupled with other research data helps assist in the further study for better implant success rates, etc.

The Distribution of Implant Patients and the Type of Implant Site / 대한치주과학회지

Nowdays, the awareness of implant treatment has grown rapidly among dentists and patients alike in Korea, as it becomes a widely accepted treatment. The reason is that unlike crown and bridge or denture treatment, implant treatment helps preserve existing bone and improve masticatory functions. So, It is needed understanding about the type, distribution of implant patient. The following results on patient type and implant distribution were compiled from 4433 implant cases of 1596 patients treated at the periodontal dept. of Y University Hospital during 1992 to 2004. 1. There are no dissimilarities between men and women, with patients in their 40, 50s accounting for 52.5% of patients and 57.5% of implant treatments; the largest share of patients and implant treatments. 2. Mn. posterior area accounted for 54.9% of implant treatments followed by Mx. posterior area(27.6%), Mx anterior area(11.9%) and Mn anterior area(5.6%). 3. Partial edentulous patients treated by single crown and bridge-type prosthesis accounted for 97.5% and fully edentulous patient accounted for the remaining 2.5%. 4. The major cause of tooth loss is periodontal disease, followed by dental caries, trauma and congenital missing. Also, older people are more likely to suffer from tooth loss due to periodontal disease rather than dental caries. 5. In the distribution of bone quality for maxillae, type III was most, followed by type II, r type IV and r type I. As for mandible, type II was most, followed by type III, type IV and for type I. 6. In the distribution of bone quantity for maxillae, type C was most, followed by type B, type D, type A, and for type E. As for mandible, type B was 52% most, followed by type C, type D, type A and type E. 7. The majority of implants were those of 10-14mm in length (85.2%) and regular diameter in width (64%). The results provided us with basic data on patient type, implant distribution, bone condition, etc. We wish that our results coupled with other research data helps assist in the further study for better implant success/survival rates, etc.

The Study of Implant Patient's Type and Implant Distribution / 대한치주과학회지

It has been approximately 40 years since Branemark first introduced osseo-integration for implants in the early 1960s. Unlike crown and bridge or denture treatment, implant treatment helps preserve existing bone and improve masticatory functions. Thus, the awareness of implant treatment has grown rapidly among dentists and patients alike in Korea, as it becomes a widely accepted treatment. The following results on patient type and implant distribution were compiled from 1814 implant cases of 640 patients treated at the periodontal dept. of Y University Hospital during 1992 to 2001. 1. There are no dissimilarities between men and women, with patients in their 40, 50s accounting for 49% of patients and 56% of implant treatments; the largest share of patients and implant treatments. 2. Mn. posterior area accounted for 59% of implant treatments followed by Mx. posterior area(21%), Mx anterior area(14%) and Mn anterior area(6%). 3. Partial edentulous patients treated by single crown and bridge-type prosthesis accounted for 98% and fully edentulous patient accounted for the remaining 2%. 4. The major cause of tooth loss is periodontal disease, followed by dental caries, trauma and congenital missing. Compared to women, men are more likely to suffer from tooth loss due to periodontal disease. Also, older people are more likely to suffer from tooth loss due to periodontal disease rather than dental caries. 5. The distribution of bone quality for maxillae was 52% for type III, followed by 28% for type II, 20% for type IV and 0% for type I. As for mandible, the distribution was 52% for type II, followed by 37% for type III, 7% for type IV and 4% for type I. 6. The distribution of bone quantity for maxillae was 49% for type C, followed by 34% for type B, 14% for type D, 3% for type A, and 0% for type E. As for mandible, the distribution was 52% for type B, followed by 39% for type C, 6% for type D, 3% for type A and 0% for type E. 7. The majority of implants were those of 10-14mm in length (80%) and regular diameter in width (79%). The results provided us with basic data on patient type, implant distribution, bone condition, etc. We wish that our results coupled with other research data helps assist in the further study for better implant success/survival rates, etc.