Palatal approach for maxillary alveolar distraction.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this report was to describe a surgical technique for performing alveolar distraction in the upper jaw via a palatal approach. PATIENTS AND METHODS: To illustrate this technique we report 2 clinical cases in which palatal-approach alveolar distraction was used to rectify insufficient alveolar rim height. The first case involves a 50-year-old man with atrophy of the alveolar rim in the posterior upper jaw. From the palatal side, a transport segment pedicled to the vestibular mucosa was cut, and 2 Lead System distractors (Leibinger, Kalamazoo, MI) were placed. The second case involves a 23-year-old woman with a bone defect in the alveolar rim in the premaxillary sector of the upper jaw. Again, from the palatal side, a transport segment pedicled to the vestibular mucosa was cut, and a single Lead System distractor was placed. RESULTS: In both cases the height of the alveolar rim was successfully increased by 8 mm, allowing placement of three 12-mm implants in case 1, and two 12-mm implants in case 2. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend a palatal approach and intraosseous distractors for alveolar distraction in the upper jaw.

Peripheral giant-cell granuloma. Review of 13 cases.

Peripheral giant-cell granuloma is an infrequent exophytic lesion of the oral cavity, also known as giant-cell epulis, osteoclastoma, giant-cell reparative granuloma, or giant-cell hyperplasia. The present study reports 13 cases on patients that visited the Oral Medicine department of the Dental Faculty in the Santiago de Compostela University. We report the location, size, course and treatment of each lesion, comparing the results obtained to those reported in the literature. We discuss differential diagnosis with respect to other entities, in particular brown tumor of hyperparathyroidism, cherubism, and aneurysmal bone cyst, all of which show very similar histological appearance to peripheral giant-cell granuloma.

Minor complications arising in alveolar distraction osteogenesis.

PURPOSE: This study evaluates complications that arise during mandibular alveolar distraction osteogenesis and suggests treatments. METHODS: We monitored complications that arose during alveolar distraction osteogenesis in 5 patients who underwent a total of 7 distractions, in all cases using an intraosseous distractor (Lead System, Leibinger, Germany). We report our responses to each type of complication. RESULTS: All 7 distractions were followed by the placement of 2 implants. The restoration was ideal in 4 of the 7 cases and functional but not ideal in the remaining 3. In all 7 distractions, we observed complications, although many were minor complications readily avoided by the use of appropriate technique. The complications were, first, intraoperative complications, namely 1) fracture of the transport segment (1 of 7 cases; RESPONSE: appropriate preventative measures), 2) difficulties in finishing the osteotomy on the lingual side (7 of 7 cases; RESPONSE: use of fine chisels made from cement spatulas), and 3) excessive length of the threaded rod (1 of 7 cases; RESPONSE: cut the rod). Second, complications arose during distraction: 1) incorrect direction of distraction (2 of 7 cases; no corrective measures necessary in the present cases), 2) perforation of the mucosa by the transport segment (2 of 7 cases; response: smooth the crest of the segment with a bone rongeur), and 3) suture dehiscence (1 of 7 cases; no significant implications). Third, there were postdistraction complications, namely bone formation defects (4 of 7 cases; response: guided bone regeneration). CONCLUSIONS: A number of complications may arise during alveolar distraction osteogenesis. Most of these complications can be considered minor and are readily avoided or resolved by the use of appropriate procedures.