Peri-implant bone loss around posterior mandible dental implants placed after distraction osteogenesis: preliminary findings.

BACKGROUND: The present study evaluates implant survival and peri-implant bone loss around posterior mandible dental implants placed at sites of distraction osteogenesis. METHODS: On removal of the distraction devices, 34 dental implants were inserted into 14 posterior mandible sites in 10 healthy, non-smoking female patients. Prosthetic treatment was performed 4 months after implant placement using fixed implant prostheses. After 6 to 16.5 months, periapical radiographs were taken and evaluated for peri-implant bone loss and radiolucency. The distance between the implant margin and the first visible bone-implant contact was measured on the mesial and distal aspects of the implants using imaging software. Radiographic dimensional distortion was corrected as a function of the known true dimension of the implant. RESULTS: Of the 34 implants placed, two (5.9%) failed to integrate at reentry surgery. Both were replaced and restored during the course of the study so that a total of 34 implants was followed for 12.1 +/- 3.8 months post-restoration and 16.1 +/- 3.8 months post-insertion. Mean loss of marginal bone height was 2.6 +/- 1.0 mm. During the follow-up period, radiolucent lines along the implant surface were absent. CONCLUSIONS: The mean peri-implant bone loss in areas of alveolar bone distraction was 1.9 mm/year. A high implant survival rate was observed.

Posterior mandibular alveolar distraction osteogenesis utilizing an extraosseous distractor: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this clinical study was to evaluate bone elongation and the effectiveness of distraction osteogenesis when utilizing an extraosseous distractor to treat cases of atrophic posterior mandible. METHODS: Fourteen surgical sites were evaluated in 10 healthy, non-smoking, female patients, with varying degrees of atrophic posterior mandible, who underwent surgery by alveolar bone distraction. The patients presented between 6 and 10 mm above the mandibular, inferior alveolar nerve. Panoramic radiographs were taken before surgery and at the beginning and end of the consolidation period. The extraosseous distractor was fixed to both the basal and the osteotomized bone. After a 7-day latency period, the patients rotated the distractor rod three times a day for 3 to 10 days (1 mm per day). The mobile segment was held in place for 8 to 12 weeks for bone consolidation. RESULTS: The results revealed a distraction range of 2.32 to 8.11 mm (mean distraction +/- standard deviation, 5.12 +/- 1.67 mm), which was less than the real, measured distance between the upper and lower miniplates of the distractor (5.58 +/- 1.62 mm). The bone segments showed between 0.03 and 2.53 mm (mean, 0.88 +/- 0.59 mm) resorption above the upper miniplate. The efficacy of the extraosseous distractor was calculated as between 30.41% and 94.58% (73.45% +/- 20.32%). CONCLUSIONS: Bone regeneration was obtained in all cases; however, when planning alveolar bone distraction using the extraosseous distractor, greater distraction should be performed to compensate for the inclination of the distractor rod and possible bone loss. This adjustment should increase the efficacy of distraction osteogenesis.