These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Alveolar ridge augmentation by distraction osteogenesis.
    Author: Rachmiel A, Srouji S, Peled M.
    Journal: Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2001 Dec; 30(6):510-7. PubMed ID: 11829233.
    Abstract:
    Distraction osteogenesis is an alternative method for reconstructing atrophic alveolar bone. Fourteen patients underwent vertical alveolar distraction by the LEAD SYSTEM-Endosseous Alveolar Distraction System (Stryker Leibinger, Kalamazoo, MI). An alveolar segmental osteotomy was carried out and the vertical distraction device was mounted. In patients with an extensive alveolar defect, two distraction devices were placed in order to better control the vector of elongation in both bone edges. The distraction was started on the fourth postoperative day at a rate of 0.8 mm/day for 10-16 days, followed by a consolidation period of 60 days. Vertical distraction osteogenesis (VDO) was completed successfully in all patients with segment lengths in the range of 8 to 13 mm and with an average of 10.3 mm. Subsequently, the devices were removed and 23 threaded titanium dental implants were placed for osteointegration. Earlier mineralization in the vertically distracted area was seen radiographically during the consolidation period. In a follow up of 6-20 months after the distraction, 22 implants were successfully osteointegrated while one implant failed due to improper distracted segment stability. As a result of alveolar distraction, a segment of mature bone was transported vertically in order to lengthen the crest for better implant anchorage, either for aesthetic purposes or for functional prosthetic requirements. The main advantages of VDO are: (1) augmentation of alveolar bone height with new bone formation and simultaneous expansion of the soft tissues; (2) no bone harvesting is necessary; (3) the technique has a lower morbidity rate compared with conventional techniques; (4) it makes the insertion of longer dental implants feasible.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]