The risk for infraposition of dental implants and ankylosed teeth in the anterior maxilla related to craniofacial growth, a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to evaluate a potential association between individuals with different craniofacial types or other exposures, and the risk of infraposition due to continued growth/eruption of adjacent teeth in the anterior maxilla. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a systematic review in which primary studies as well as other systematic reviews are scrutinised. A search of PubMed (Medline), Scopus, Web of science and Health technology assessment (HTA) organisations and a complementary handsearch was carried out. Selected studies were read in full-text by several reviewers. The quality of the included primary studies was assessed using a protocol for assessment of risk of bias in exposure studies. RESULTS: The literature search resulted in 3,296 publications. Title and abstract screening yielded 25, whereof one systematic review, potential publications allocated for full-text inspection. The quality assessment resulted in a total of seven studies with a low/moderate risk of bias and four studies with a high risk of bias. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, a long-term risk for infraposition of dental implants, or ankylosed teeth, among natural teeth can be observed in some cases. The predisposing factors are still not fully understood since the current scientific evidence is very limited.

A rater agreement study on measurements in cross-sectional CBCT images exploring the association between alveolar bone morphology and craniofacial height.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate rater agreement regarding measurements of height and width of the maxilla and mandible using cross-sectional images from CBCT examinations. Furthermore, to explore the association between vertical craniofacial height and alveolar bone morphology. METHODS: Pre-treatment CBCT scans from 450 patients referred for treatment to a private clinic for orthodontics and oral surgery in Scandinavia were available and of these, 180 were selected. Lateral head images were generated from the CBCT volumes to categorise subjects into three groups based on their craniofacial height. Cross-sectional images of the maxillary and mandibular bodies at three locations in the maxilla and mandible, respectively, were obtained and measured at one height and two width recordings by five raters. One-way analysis of variance with a Tukey post hoc test was performed. A significance level of 5% was used. RESULTS: Rater agreement was mostly excellent or good when measuring height and width of the maxilla and mandible in cross-sectional CBCT images. For height (of the alveolar bone/bodies), there were statistically significant differences between the low- and the high-angle groups for all the observers when measuring in the premolar and midline regions, both in the maxilla and in the mandible. CONCLUSION: The high agreement found ensures a reliable measurement technique and confirms the relation between craniofacial height and alveolar bone height and width.

Craniofacial Height in Relation to Cross-Sectional Morphology of the Anterior Maxilla: An Anatomical Consideration in Implant Therapy.

PURPOSE: Patients who have a vertical growth pattern are more prone to complete alveolar bone growth later and run a higher risk for inhibition of growth and infraposition after implants have been placed. Moreover, it has been suggested for the same category of patients that craniofacial height may influence the alveolar bone morphology of the anterior maxilla during growth. Hence, it is important to identify such patients early when considering implant treatment in young patients. The purpose of this study was to investigate the height and width of the alveolar bone in the anterior maxilla in subjects with different craniofacial heights to assess if there is a relation between craniofacial height and the dimensions of the alveolar bone in the anterior part of the maxilla. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Measurements on cephalograms and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images of the maxilla from 180 fully dentate subjects were analyzed and categorized into three angle groups based on the craniofacial height: low-, normal-, and high-angle groups. Measurements of the alveolar bone were taken interradicular, at six reference points distributed between the first premolar regions in the maxilla. The height and width of the alveolar bone were measured with a standardized technique at 3, 6, 9, and 12 mm from the top of the alveolar process. RESULTS: Significant differences were found regarding the height of the alveolar bone in all the subgroups and regarding the width in the 9- and 12-mm subgroups, and between low-/normal- and low-/high-angle groups, where the high-angle group represented the thinnest alveolar bone. A significant difference was found between male and female patients concerning all dimensions of the alveolar bone. CONCLUSION: There is a relation between craniofacial height and the dimensions of the alveolar bone in the anterior part of the maxilla. Craniofacial height is an important factor to analyze when implant treatment is considered in the maxillary anterior region. This identification can preferably be carried out early in young patients who are still growing when various treatment options can still be considered.

Prophylactic antibiotics for staged bone augmentation in implant dentistry.

Background: The objective of the study was to assess the effect of prophylactic antibiotics on the outcome of bone augmentation and subsequent dental implant placement by combining the recommended quality assessment methods for systematic reviews and primary studies.Materials and methods: This is a complex systematic review in which systematic reviews as well as primary studies are scrutinised. A search of Medline (OVID), The Cochrane Library (Wiley) and EMBASE, PubMed and Health technology assessment (HTA) organisations as-well as a complementary hand-search was carried out. Selected primary studies were assessed using GRADE. Each study was reviewed by three authors independently.Results: Abstract screening yielded six potential systematic reviews allocated for full-text inspection. A total of ten primary studies were read in full-text. No relevant systematic reviews regarding the topic of this article were found. The quality assessment resulted in two primary studies with a moderate risk of bias. Of the two studies with a moderate risk of bias, one compared a single dose of clindamycin 600 mg preoperatively with the same preoperative dose followed by four doses of 300 mg every 6 h. The second study compared a single dose prophylaxis of two different types of antibiotic compounds.Conclusion: In conclusion, the scientific evidence regarding the use of antibiotic prophylaxis for reducing the risk of infection in conjunction with bone augmentation procedures during dental implant placement is very limited. The infection rate as compared to nonusage of prophylactic antibiotics, selection of the most suitable compound, and the optimal duration of prophylactic treatment is still unknown.

Dental Implant Quality Register-A possible tool to further improve implant treatment and outcome.

The Board of EAO (European Association for Osseointegration) has discussed an initiative to explore the conditions to establish a Dental Implant Register. It was suggested to bring this issue to the EAO Consensus Conference 2018 for a discussion and to possibly propose relevant and manageable parameters. This article presents some select examples from quality registers in the medical field. Based on the experience of established registers, essentially in the medical field, factors considered to be of importance, if and when establishing a Dental Implant Register are introduced and discussed.

Peri-implant diseases.

When celebrating 100 yr of dental research in the Nordic dental research community (i.e. Nordisk Odontologisk Förening (NOF)), it is relevant to include dental implant treatment. In essence, the successful progress of implant treatment has added both to the quality of life for patients and also to many aspects of professional development and job satisfaction for dentists. When appreciating the success story it also seems relevant to highlight some of the problems related to this treatment. Both technical and biological complications have often been ignored when reporting long-term results following implant treatment. Different opinions have been expressed in relation to the etiology of peri-implant diseases. Some even choose to ignore this condition as a clinical problem. This article presents a short overview of peri-implant diseases (i.e. peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis). The lack of internationally agreed disease definitions for peri-implant diseases, as with periodontitis, results in wide variation of estimates for the occurrence of peri-implant diseases when epidemiological data are reported. The profession still strives to find and define the best way to deal with peri-implant diseases once they are accurately diagnosed. Awareness of the tissue conditions in the peri-implant area, and relevant action when indicated, seems to be critical for the continued long-term successful outcome of dental implant treatment.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in orthognathic surgery: A complex systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: In orthognathic surgery, antibiotics are prescribed to reduce the risk of postoperative infection. However, there is lack of consensus over the appropriate drug, the dose and duration of administration. The aim of this complex systematic review was to assess the effect of antibiotics on postoperative infections in orthognathic surgery. METHODS: Both systematic reviews and primary studies were assessed. Medline (OVID), The Cochrane Library (Wiley) and EMBASE (embase.com), PubMed (non-indexed articles) and Health Technology Assessment (HTA) publications were searched. The primary studies were assessed using GRADE and the systematic reviews by AMSTAR. RESULTS: Screening of abstracts yielded 6 systematic reviews and 36 primary studies warranting full text scrutiny. In total,14 primary studies were assessed for risk of bias. Assessment of the included systematic reviews identified two studies with a moderate risk of bias, due to inclusion in the meta-analyses of primary studies with a high risk of bias. Quality assessment of the primary studies disclosed one with a moderate risk of bias and one with a low risk. The former compared a single dose of antibiotic with 24 hour prophylaxis using the same antibiotic; the latter compared oral and intravenous administration of antibiotics. Given the limited number of acceptable studies, no statistical analysis was undertaken, as it was unlikely to contribute any relevant information. CONCLUSION: With respect to antibiotic prophylaxis in orthognathic surgery, most of the studies to date have been poorly conducted and reported. Thus scientific uncertainty remains as to the preferred antibiotic and the optimal duration of administration.

Craniofacial height in relation to cross-sectional maxillary and mandibular morphology.

BACKGROUND: In order to gain a better understanding of how growth of the alveolar bone is linked to the vertical development of the face, the purpose of this study was to investigate if there is an association between the cross-sectional morphology of the maxillary and mandibular bodies with the craniofacial height, using images from cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). METHODS: From 450 pre-treatment CBCT scans, 180 were selected to be included in the study. Lateral head images were generated from the CBCT scans and were used to categorise subjects into three groups based on their vertical craniofacial height. Cross-sectional images from CBCT volumes were reformatted of the maxillary and mandibular bodies at five locations in the maxilla and five in the mandible. Each image was measured at one height and two width measurements. Statistical analysis performed was the one-way analysis of variance with a Tukey post hoc test. A significance level of 5% was used in all comparisons. RESULTS: Patients with large vertical craniofacial height had a significantly higher cross-sectional area both in the maxilla and in the mandible. In the same group, the cross-sectional area was significantly thinner in the mandible compared with the other two groups, especially in the anterior region. CONCLUSIONS: This study further highlights the close relationship between craniofacial height and alveolar bone dimensions and contributes with important knowledge for planning and follow-up of comprehensive dental- and orthodontic treatments.