ABSTRACT
The objective of this study was to evaluate the presence, position, and diameter of the intraosseous branch (IObr) of the posterior superior alveolar artery in fully edentulous patients. Two-hundred five computed tomography scans of fully edentulous patients were analyzed. The presence of the IObr was investigated in the coronal plane at the lateral wall of the maxillary sinus. In patients in whom the IObr was detected, the artery diameter was measured, and the distance from the artery to the bone crest of the alveolar ridge, the maxillary sinus floor, and the distance of the maxillary sinus floor to the bone crest of the alveolar ridge were measured as well. A descriptive statistical analysis of these parameters was conducted. The IObr was identified in the maxillary sinus in 105 tomography images (51.2%), and its diameter varied between 0.8 and 3.3âmm (1.29â±â0.49âmm). The IObr presented with an artery diameter less than 1âmm in 29% of the patients, between 1 and 2âmm diameter in 61% of the patients and with a diameter larger than 2âmm in 10% of patients. Regarding the IObr topography, the distance from the artery to the floor of the maxillary sinus was 9.62â±â4.59âmm, and the distance from the artery to the top of crestal bone was 15.15â±â4.47âmm. At least 10% of edentulous patients are at risk of bleeding complications during interventions in the maxillary sinus.
Subject(s)
Jaw, Edentulous/diagnostic imaging , Maxilla/blood supply , Maxillary Artery/diagnostic imaging , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Maxilla/diagnostic imaging , Middle Aged , PrevalenceABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The objective of this randomized controlled clinical split-mouth trial was to compare anodized implant surfaces and implant surfaces modified by acid etching in terms of primary and secondary stability. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-six implants were placed bilaterally in the posterior mandibles of 23 patients. Each patient received one implant with a surface treated by acid (AC) and the other with an anodized implant surface (ANO). The selection of the side where the implant was placed was chosen randomly by lot. The implants were evaluated with respect to insertion torque within the surgical bed and primary and secondary stability by testing the implant stability quotient (ISQ) at five different times (immediate postoperative period and 21, 30, 60, and 180 days after surgery). The paired t test was used to compare the two groups, and ANOVA Repeated Measures complemented by the Tukey posttest were used for longitudinal analysis of the implants in each group. All tests were applied with a confidence level of 95% (P < .05). RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was detected between the AC and ANO groups regarding insertion torque. ISQ analysis revealed that the AC group showed statistically higher values than the ANO group at the 21-day period (P < .05); however, no other statistically significant differences were detected at the other times. CONCLUSION: The different surfaces were similar in terms of primary and secondary stability of implants placed in the posterior mandible.
