[Bilateral autogenous transplantation of impacted maxillary canines]. / Bilaterale autologe transplantatie van geïmpacteerde maxillaire cuspidaten.

In a fifteen-year-old girl, bilaterally impacted permanent maxillary canines were established. A difficult palatinal placement and an apical deviation were found in both teeth. Surgical exposure of the canines, followed by orthodontic traction was not desirable. Both remaining primary canines showed signs of resorption. Autogenous transplantation of the maxillary canines was the treatment chosen.

Reaching the vertical versus horizontal target position in multi-segmental Le Fort I osteotomy is more difficult, but yields comparably stable results to one-segment osteotomy.

This retrospective cohort study evaluated the postoperative outcomes of preoperatively planned positional changes for Le Fort I osteotomy in 77 patients (average age 26.6 years). Movement relapse and planning accuracy were evaluated by lateral cephalometric analysis, with an average follow-up of 257 days. In one-segment osteotomy cases, 73% of the horizontal movements were positioned within 2mm of the surgical plan. With posterior-inferior repositioning of the maxilla, results fell within 2mm of the prescribed plan in 60% of cases. Maxillary advancement and superior repositioning proved more stable than inferior maxillary repositioning. Relapse did not differ between three-piece and one-piece osteotomies for any movements; however, in three-piece cases, only half of the positional changes on average stayed within 2mm of the prescribed surgical plan. Relapse did not vary with bone grafting among the groups. To summarize, in most Le Fort I osteotomy cases, the surgical plan is achieved within 2mm, with posterior extrusion of the maxilla showing the greatest deviation both in reaching the target and maintaining the result achieved. Although maxillary segmentation makes the surgical plan more difficult to achieve, the results are at least as stable as those of one-piece osteotomies.

Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw in oncological patients with skeletal metastases: conservative treatment is effective up to stage 2.

There is currently no widespread strategy for treating medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ), so our aim was to evaluate retrospectively the outcome of a minimally invasive treatment protocol for patients with both MRONJ and cancer. We designed a retrospective cohort study of patients with cancer who had been diagnosed with MRONJ after treatment with denosumab or bisphosphonates given intravenously. Primary outcome measures were improvement in the clinical stage of MRONJ and the time course to its resolution. Secondary outcome measures included the incidence of risk factors and patterns of treatment. Seventy-nine patients with 109 lesions were enrolled, and their characteristics, presentation of the lesions, complications, and relations to previous oral interventions were recorded. Treatment depended on the stage of disease, and included conservative medical, and minimally-invasive surgical, procedures. There was complete healing and resolution of disease in 38/57 stage 1 lesions, 30/47 stage 2 lesions, and 3/5 stage 3 lesions. The symptoms improved in 16/47 stage 2 lesions, and 2/5 stage 3 lesions. Fifteen of the stage 1 lesions, and one of the stage 2 lesions, failed to respond. Despite the possibility of an aggressive approach to the treatment of MRONJ, conservative treatment remains the first line of defence as regression is obvious, with evidence of no evolution to a higher stage. In our experience surgical intervention is recommended in persistent stage 3 MRONJ that has failed to respond to conservative treatment.

Osteoradionecrosis and medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw: similarities and differences.

The purpose of this study was to compare medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) with osteoradionecrosis (ORN). Group 1 comprised 74 MRONJ patients (93 lesions) and group 2 comprised 59 ORN patients (69 lesions). Patient characteristics, clinical presentation of the lesions, the presence of complications, and the relationship with previous dental extractions were analyzed for both groups. Significant differences were found between the groups with regard to the characteristics of the patient populations, extraction as the precipitating event, the type of initial complaint, the prevalence of pain, and the location of the lesions. In the ORN group, significantly more patients complained of pain (P=0.0108) compared with the MRONJ group. Furthermore, significantly more pathological fractures (P<0.0001) and skin fistulae (P<0.0001) occurred in the ORN group. The treatment was more often conservative in the MRONJ group than in the ORN group (61.3% vs. 36.2%). Despite similarities in terms of imaging, risk factors, prevention, and treatment, MRONJ and ORN are two distinct pathological entities, as highlighted by the differences in patient characteristics, the initial clinical presentation, course of the disease, and outcome.