Outcome of bone availability after secondary alveolar bone graft in two age groups.

The aim of this study is to evaluate outcome of bone availability after the secondary alveolar bone graft in 2 age groups: group 1 patients were between 9 and 13 years old and group 2 patients were above 14 years old. Acceptance success criteria (ASC) consisted of sufficient bone height (more than 10 mm), bone width (more than 4 mm), and adequate continuity between maxillary segments. The height and width of alveolar grafted bone were measured by using the cone-beam CT scans. We studied 45 patients who underwent a bone graft in their alveolar cleft in 2 groups (25 patients in group 1 and 20 in group 2). The results showed that as the patients' ages increased, the incidence of ASC significantly decreased. In group 1, 23 patients had ACS (92%), and in group 2, only 4 patients (20%) had ASC. Cleft type did not affect the ASC. The critical age for decreasing ASC was 14.5 years. Our study showed successful outcomes of grafted bone were good when done in the mixed dentition period. Additionally, bone availability was more predictable at the mixed dentition stage.

Comparison of nonsurgical treatment options in pediatric condylar fractures: rigid intermaxillary fixation versus using guiding elastic therapy.

A prospective study was done to compare rigid intermaxillary fixation and guiding elastic for treatment of condylar fractures in pediatric patients. Sixty-one children younger than 12 years with condylar fractures were studied in 2 groups. Group 1 consisted of 31 patients who were treated with arch bar and intermaxillary fixation for 7 to 12 days, and group 2 consisted of 30 patients who were treated with arch bar and elastics without rigid intermaxillary fixation. Patients had minimal function during treatment time, which lasted 7 to 12 days. Evaluation of deviation on opening between both groups (groups 1 and 2) with a χ test did not show any relationship between them. Incidence of temporomandibular dysfunction signs was 25.8% in group 1 patients and 23.3% in group 2 patients. Comparison of temporomandibular dysfunction signs in both treatment groups did not show a statistically significant relationship. Our study showed the same results using guiding elastics as using rigid intermaxillary fixation in pediatric condylar fractures. Guiding elastic is more tolerable, and children have function during treatment.

Do angulated implants increase the amount of bone loss around implants in the anterior maxilla?

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the relation between angulated implants and the bone loss around implants in the anterior maxilla. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The subjects studied had a missing tooth in the anterior maxilla and a bone deficiency that required restoration with an angulated dental implant. After mounting the casts on the articulator, the amount of direction was measured with a facebow by calculating the difference between the mean buccopalatal angulation of the 2 adjacent natural teeth and the buccopalatal angulation of the implant abutment to the occlusal plane. Radiography was performed in each patient immediately after loading and repeated a minimum of 36 months after loading. RESULTS: Fifty-eight subjects who received delayed-loading angulated implants were studied. The results showed that the mean implant angulation was 15.2° and the mean bone resorption was 0.87 mm. Analysis of the data showed a significant correlation between implant follow-up time and bone loss. No correlation was seen between the implant angulation and bone loss. An assessment of predictive factors showed a relation between the implant type and bone loss. The follow-up time had a significant effect on bone loss. The implant angulation did not change bone resorption on the mesial and distal surfaces of the implants. CONCLUSIONS: The angulation of implants was not associated with an increased risk for bone loss, and angulated implants may be a satisfactory alternative to vertical implants to avoid grafting procedures. The type of implant may be an important factor that affects bone resorption, although follow-up time was the strongest predictive factor.