Does timing of secondary alveolar bone grafting affect the need for additional bone augmentation prior to implant placement at cleft sites?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark A. Green ◽  
Bonnie L. Padwa
Keyword(s):  
Bone Grafting ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Bone Augmentation ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Alveolar Bone Grafting ◽  
Secondary Alveolar Bone Grafting

scholarly journals Evaluation of Secondary and Late Secondary Alveolar Bone Grafting on 66 Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Patients

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 194-199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ravi Mahajan ◽  
Harish Ghildiyal ◽  
Ankit Khasgiwala ◽  
Gogulnathan Muthukrishnan ◽  
Sukhdeep kahlon
Keyword(s):  
Bone Grafting ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Late Presentation ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Alveolar Bone Grafting ◽  
The Face ◽  
Secondary Alveolar Bone Grafting ◽  
Bony Consolidation

Objective: The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the outcomes of secondary alveolar bone grafting and late secondary alveolar bone grafting in 66 unilateral cleft lip and palate patients. Materials and Methods: The total patients were 66 unilateral cleft lip and palate patients, out of which 19 patients underwent secondary alveolar bone grafting and 47 patients underwent late secondary alveolar bone grafting. Autogenous anterior iliac crest cancellous bone graft was harvested and used for grafting the alveolar clefts. Radiographic assessment based on Enemark’s scoring according to the marginal bone levels was done on the intraoral periapical radiographs taken 6 months after performing the surgery. Results: Twelve (63%) out of the 19 patients on whom secondary alveolar bone grafting was done achieved score 1 (optimal marginal bone levels), whereas only 12 (25%) out of the 47 patients achieved score 1 amongst the late secondary alveolar bone graftings. Overall results showed, probability, P = .034 (statistically significant). Conclusion: This study reaffirmed the fact that alveolar bone grafting when done in preadolescent age group (secondary alveolar bone grafting) gives better results in terms of marginal bony consolidation and maintaining the continuity of the alveolar arch, but the late presentation (late secondary alveolar bone grafting) should not be the refusal criteria for performing the alveolar bone grafting. Although the latter patients may not be rewarded in terms of bony consolidation as much as the preadolescent patients the potential of successful surgery in them still exists in terms of providing a platform for the dental implant placement, improvement in the soft tissue symmetry and aesthetics of the face.

Does Early Secondary Alveolar Bone Grafting Influence Need for Additional Maxillary Advancement Procedures in Cleft Lip and Palate?

2021 ◽  
pp. 105566562110427
Author(s):  
Kathlyn K. Powell ◽  
Paul Lewis ◽  
Rae Sesanto ◽  
Peter D. Waite
Keyword(s):  
Bone Grafting ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Treated Patient ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Mixed Dentition ◽  
Maxillary Advancement ◽  
Alveolar Bone Grafting ◽  
Secondary Alveolar Bone Grafting

Objective To determine if secondary alveolar bone grafting (SABG) timing in patients with cleft lip and palate (CLP) influences the future need for additional maxillary advancement procedures, particularly Le Fort I osteotomy with rigid external distraction (RED). Design Retrospective cohort study. Groups were separated by SABG timing: early mixed dentition (ages 68 years) or late mixed dentition (ages 9-11 years). The criterion for RED was negative overjet ≥8 mm, and sufficient dental development for RED. Setting Single tertiary care institution. Patients Patients with CLP that underwent SABG from 2010 to 2015. Exclusion criteria included syndromic conditions, SABG surgery at age >12 years, current age <12 years, and <2 years follow-up. 104 patients were included. Main outcome measures The number of RED candidates and treated patients. Results There was no statistical difference in the number of RED candidates ( P  =  .0718) nor treated patients ( P  =  .2716) based on SABG timing; stratification by laterality was also insignificant. Early SABG is associated with higher odds of being a RED candidate (pooled, unilateral, bilateral) and treated patient (pooled and unilateral); however, there were no statistically significant associations between SABG timing and the number of RED candidates and treated patients as determined by logistic regression models. Conclusion There is no statistically significant association between SABG timing and the odds of being a RED candidate or treated patient. Future prospective studies are recommended to assess the relationship between SABG timing and maxillary growth in patients with CLP.

Tibial healing after secondary alveolar bone grafting: Usefulness of ultrasonography

2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 177-183
Author(s):  
Hiroyuki Hanai ◽  
Kenichi Kurita ◽  
Koki Imaoka ◽  
Shoya Mizuno ◽  
Yoshihito Matsui ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Grafting ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Alveolar Bone Grafting ◽  
Secondary Alveolar Bone Grafting

Secondary Alveolar Bone Grafting (CLEFTSiS) 2007–2010

2016 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 141-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Paterson ◽  
Jennifer Rae ◽  
Paul Paterson ◽  
Toby Gilgrass ◽  
Mark Devlin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Grafting ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Alveolar Bone Grafting ◽  
Secondary Alveolar Bone Grafting

Radiographic Assessment of Secondary Autogenous Alveolar Bone Grafting in Cleft Lip and Palate Patients

1997 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 195-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy D. Kindelan ◽  
Robert R. Nashed ◽  
Michael R. Bromige
Keyword(s):  
Bone Grafting ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Kappa Statistic ◽  
Observer Agreement ◽  
Point Scale ◽  
Alveolar Bone Grafting ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Secondary Alveolar Bone Grafting

Objective To assess if a 4-point, radiographically based scale could be used between operators to reliably assess the success of secondary alveolar bone grafting. Design The study was retrospective with the clinicians blind to patient identity. Radiographs were examined twice by two clinicians with 1 week between assessments. Setting The research was carried out in a hospital-based orthodontic/oral and maxillofacial unit. Patients All patients who had secondary alveolar bone grafting in this unit between February 1992 and March 1995 were included In this study. There were 38 patients with a total of 48 grafted sites. Interventions The bone graft site was radiographed following orthodontic expansion prior to grafting. The radiograph was repeated postoperatively at a mean of 4 months after surgery. Main Outcome Measure The degree of bony fill in the cleft area was assessed using a 4-point scale: Grade 1 >75% bony fill; Grade 2 50–75% bony fill; Grade 3 < 50% bony fill; Grade 4 no complete bony bridge. Results Overall, 50% of grafts achieved grade 1, 23% were grade 2, 22% grade 3, and 5% grade 4. Levels of intra- and inter-observer agreement were highly variable (.33 to .72 kappa statistic). Conclusions The 4-point scale described could be used to assess the success of autogenous secondary alveolar bone grafting. It showed moderate to substantial intra-observer agreement, and fair-to-moderate inter-observer agreement.

scholarly journals Surgical Outcomes of Secondary Alveolar Bone Grafting and Extensive Gingivoperiosteoplasty Performed at Mixed Dentition Stage in Unilateral Complete Cleft Lip and Palate

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 576
Author(s):  
Yu-Ying Chu ◽  
Frank Chun-Shin Chang ◽  
Ting-Chen Lu ◽  
Che-Hsiung Lee ◽  
Philip Kuo-Ting Chen
Keyword(s):  
Bone Grafting ◽  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Prospective Trial ◽  
Mixed Dentition ◽  
Alveolar Bone Grafting ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Secondary Alveolar Bone Grafting

Secondary alveolar bone grafting (SABG) is associated with donor site morbidities. We aimed to compare the outcomes of SABG and extensive gingivoperiosteoplasty (EGPP) at the mixed dentition stage. This single-blinded, randomized, prospective trial enrolled 50 consecutive patients with unilateral complete cleft lip and palate who had residual alveolar bone cleft, of which 44 (19 SABG, 25 EGPP) completed the study. Bone volumes before surgery, 6 months postoperatively, and 1-year postoperatively were compared using computed tomography. The Bergland scale score was recorded at 6 months postoperatively. Both groups had the same preoperative alveolar cleft volume. On the Bergland scale, 21, 3, and 1 patient in the EGPP group and 16, 2, and 1 patient in the SABG group were classified as types I, II, and IV, respectively, which did not show significant difference. With perioperative orthodontic treatment, the 1-year residual bone defect volume in both groups did not show significant difference (SABG 0.12 cm3 vs. EGPP at 0.14 cm3, p > 0.05). The study was not able to reveal much difference between SABG and EGPP combined with perioperative orthodontic treatment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document