Bone volume collected from dental implant sites during osteotomy.

PURPOSE: Little research has been done to determine the amount of bone harvested from implant site preparations using an inline bone collector. This study looked at the amount of bone that can be harvested from common dental implant osteotomies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 24 implants were placed in 9 patients over a 3-month period. Implant size ranged from 3.75 x 13 mm to 4.75 x 13 mm. Nine implants were placed in the maxilla, and 15 implants were placed in the mandible. Seven patients were female, and 2 patients were male. The patient age ranged from 27 to 72 years. Four patients had implants placed within 5 years after tooth extraction, and 5 patients had implants placed 5 years after tooth extraction: an analysis of variance was used to determine if there were statistical differences between maxilla versus mandible, male versus female, and edentulism less than or greater than 5 years. RESULTS: The average bone volume from the 24 osteotomies was 0.195 +/- 0.099 mL. The average osteotomy site measured 4.02 x 12.90 mm. There were no statistical differences noted among maxilla and mandible, gender, or time of edentulism. CONCLUSIONS: When using an inline bone collector to harvest implant osteotomy sites, an average of 0.195 mL of bone can be obtained from a site approximately 4.0 x 13 mm. This bone can often be combined with a xenograft or alloplastic material to provide extra bulk to fill peri-implant defects. When multiple implant sites are prepared, often sufficient bone can be obtained with the bone collector alone.

An aggressive dentigerous cyst in a seven-year-old child.

A review of literature indicates that very few of these cysts are found in children less than ten years of age, in spite of the fact that the cysts are associated with the eruption and/or formation of the secondary dentition. Although dentigerous cysts are rare in the first decade of life, a thorough review of a child's initial radiographs is of obvious importance as indicated by this case report. Of prime importance in this matter is the age at which the initial panoramic radiographic examination is performed on a child. According to the guidelines recommended by the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry, the first panoramic radiographic examination should be performed following the eruption of the first permanent tooth. In this case, the appropriate radiographic survey was not conducted. A proper survey should include: Proper exposure of the film. Proper development of the film. Proper interpretation of the film. This child had a quadrant of dentistry performed three months prior to the discovery of the lesion. The previous dental provider noted that a panoramic radiograph had been exposed. It is unclear whether all of the aforementioned steps were followed or completed in order for the provider to obtain the information needed to render a diagnosis, and to properly refer this patient for a more in-depth examination of her mandibular swelling. The mere fact that this child's right mandibular first molar was fully erupted and the left one had not erupted at all, would be reason enough to take a panoramic radiograph to investigate the cause of the clinical absence of the contralateral first molar. This article has presented a case in which a proper panoramic radiographic examination performed at the time of eruption of the first permanent tooth may have led to an earlier diagnosis of the cyst, and thus might have prevented the loss of multiple permanent teeth.