Retrospective evaluation of 211 patients with maxillofacial reconstruction using parietal bone graft for implants insertion. Issue 9 (September 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Depeyre, Arnaud; Touzet-Roumazeille, Sandrine; Lauwers, Ludovic; Raoul, Gwenael; Ferri, Joel
• Is Part Of: Journal of cranio-maxillofacial surgery. Volume 44:Issue 9(2016)
• Page Start: 1162
• Page End: 1169
• Publication Date: 2016-09
• Subjects: Parietal bone graft -- Dental implants -- Preprosthetic oral surgical procedures; Skull -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Maxilla -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Face -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Surgery, Plastic -- Periodicals; Maxilla -- surgery -- Periodicals; Face -- surgery -- Periodicals; Skull -- surgery -- Periodicals; Oral Surgical Procedures -- Periodicals; Reconstructive Surgical Procedures -- Periodicals; Surgery, Plastic -- Periodicals; Surgery, Oral -- Periodicals; Electronic journals; 617.514
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jcms.2016.06.034
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1010-5182

Abstract

Abstract: Purpose: For a century, autologous bone grafts have been used in maxillofacial reconstruction. The ideal bone harvest site and grafting procedure remains a point of contention in regards to obtaining optimal long-term results with sufficient bone quantity and density without serious complications. More recently, confronted with growing patient requests and biomaterials development, maxillofacial surgeons and dentists have been considering these issues as they relate to pre-implant surgery. This study sought to evaluate implant success rate and complications following pre-implant surgery with parietal bone grafting. Materials and methods: A retrospective study was carried out on patients who underwent maxillofacial reconstruction of different sites (symphysis, mandibular corpus, maxillary sinus and premaxilla) for the purpose of implant insertion. Results: 311 procedures in 211 patients were included. The implant osseointegration rate was around 95%. Clinical follow-up ranged from 10 months to 11 years. A secondary procedure was performed in 6.1% of cases and we noted no serious complications at the harvest site. Discussion: With good revascularization and osseointegration of the graft, the use of parietal bone leads to an implant success rate similar to that seen in the literature. Moreover, the use of this material results in few infections and low bone resorption provided there is strict immobilization of the graft and no tension on the soft tissue sutures. Conclusion: Parietal bone grafts technique possess the required qualities for the success of implant surgery, offering results at least as interesting as others using autogenous bone and with no serious complications on donor site.