Treatment for agenesis of maxillary lateral incisors: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and safety of three orthodontic treatment modalities for agenesis of maxillary lateral incisors: 1) closing the space with the reshaped canine substituting the lateral incisor, 2) opening the space with placement of a conventional fixed bridge, and 3) opening the space with placement of a single-unit implant and an implant-supported crown. SETTING: Brazilian Cochrane Center and Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Brazil. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The following databases were investigated: Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (Edition 12, 2011), EMBASE (from 1974 to December 2011), MEDLINE (from 1965 to December 2011), LILACS (from 1966 to November 2011), and Odontology Brazilian Bibliography Database (from 1966 to November 2011). Conference abstracts, main Brazilian dissertations and theses databases, and reference lists were handsearched. This systematic review included randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including women aged 15 years or over and men aged 21 years or over who received one of the interventions stated above. Two observers independently evaluated all the studies regarding eligibility criteria and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. RESULTS: No studies were included in the review as no RCTs were found. Most of the evidence comes from case reports and narrative reviews on case reports and from three studies with a single post-intervention evaluation and non-comparable control groups with high risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: There is no scientific evidence for any of the three most common types of treatment for agenesis of the maxillary lateral incisors. RCTs into this issue are still necessary.

Traumatic atlantoaxial dislocation with odontoid fracture: A case report.

We are reporting the one-year follow-up for a case of traumatic atlantoaxial dislocation associated with an odontoid fracture. This injury combination is rare and serious because of its resulting instability. After an unsuccessful attempt at closed reduction with traction, an open reduction with occipitocervical fixation was performed using a posterior approach. Based on our experience and a review of the published literature, the method for managing such an injury is discussed. If closed reduction with traction is successful, subsequent treatment is based on the algorithms for isolated odontoid fractures. If the closed reduction fails, surgical treatment consists of an open reduction using a posterior or lateral retropharyngeal approach, and then fixation of C1-C2, which is the key procedure.

Surgical management of a combined fracture of the odontoid process with an atlas posterior arch disruption: a review of four cases.

Four cases of operated odontoid process fractures associated with a fracture of the posterior arch of the atlas are presented. Three types of surgery were performed: atlas-axis fusion, occipitocervical fusion, and odontoid process screw fixation. Based on a literature review and our experience, the therapeutic management is discussed according to the type of odontoid fracture and the presence of neurological involvement, with a reminder that wiring is not indicated when C1 posterior arch continuity is compromised.