Cargando…
Radiographic evaluation of the symphysis menti as a donor site for an autologous bone graft in pre-implant surgery
PURPOSE: This study was performed to obtain a quantitative evaluation of the cortical and cancellous bone graft harvestable from the mental and canine regions, and to evaluate the cortical vestibular thickness. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study collected cone-beam computed tomographic (CBCT) images...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3784672/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24083206 http://dx.doi.org/10.5624/isd.2013.43.3.135 |
Sumario: | PURPOSE: This study was performed to obtain a quantitative evaluation of the cortical and cancellous bone graft harvestable from the mental and canine regions, and to evaluate the cortical vestibular thickness. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study collected cone-beam computed tomographic (CBCT) images of 100 Italian patients. The limits of the mental region were established: 5 mm in front of the medial margin of each mental foramen, 5 mm under the apex of each tooth present, and above the inferior mandibular cortex. Cortical and cancellous bone volumes were evaluated using SimPlant software (SimPlant 3-D Pro, Materialize, Leuven, Belgium) tools. In addition, the cortical vestibular thickness (minimal and maximal values) was evaluated in 3 cross-sections corresponding to the right canine tooth (3(R)), the median section (M), and the left canine tooth (3(L)). RESULTS: The cortical volume was 0.71±0.23 mL (0.27-1.96 mL) and the cancellous volume was 2.16±0.76 mL (0.86-6.28 mL). The minimal cortical vestibular thickness was 1.54±0.41 mm (0.61-3.25 mm), and the maximal cortical vestibular thickness was 3.14±0.75mm(1.01-5.83 mm). CONCLUSION: The use of the imaging software allowed a patient-specific assessment of mental and canine region bone availability. The proposed evaluation method might help the surgeon in the selection of the donor site by the comparison between bone availability in the donor site and the reconstructive exigency of the recipient site. |
---|