Evaluation of the indication for surgical extraction of third molars according to the oral surgeon and the primary care dentist. Experience in the Master of Oral Surgery and Implantology at Barcelona University Dental School

Introduction: Third molar extraction is the most frequent procedure in oral surgery. The present study evaluates the indication of third molar extraction as established by the primary care dentist (PCD) and the oral surgeon, and compares the justification for extraction with the principal reason for patient consultation. Patients and method: A descriptive study was made of 319 patients subjected to surgical removal of a third molar in the context of the Master of Oral Surgery and Implantology (Barcelona University Dental School, Barcelona, Spain) between July 2004 and March 2005. The following parameters were evaluated: sex, age, molar, type of impaction, position according to the classifications of Pell and Gregory and of Winter, and the reasons justifying extraction. Results: The lower third molars were the most commonly extracted molars (73.7%). A total of 69.6% of the teeth were covered by soft tissues only. Fifty-six percent of the lower molars corresponded to Pell and Gregory Class IIB, while 42.1% were in the vertical position. The most common reason for patient reference to our Service of Oral Surgery on the part of the PCD was prophylactic removal (51.0% versus 46.1% in the case of the oral surgeon). Discussion and conclusions. Our results show prophylaxis to be the principal indication of third molar extraction, followed by orthodontic reasons. Regarding third molars with associated clinical symptoms or signs, infectious disease-including pericoronitis- was the pathology most often observed by the oral surgeon, followed by caries. This order of frequency was seen to invert in the case of third molars referred for extraction by the PCD. A vertical position predominated among the third molars with associated pathology

Complications of guided surgery and immediate loading in oral implantology: a report of 12 cases

Objectives: The growing interest in minimally invasive surgery, together with the possibility of fitting prostheses with immediate function, have led to the development of software capable of planning and manufacturing a surgical guide and prosthesis that can be placed upon conclusion of the implant surgery step. The present study evaluates the surgical and prosthetic complications of implant treatment with the guided surgery technique, together with patient comfort during and after treatment. Patients and methods: A retrospective observational study was made of 19 patients with partially or totally edentulous upper and/or lower maxillae, involving the placement of a total of 122 implants. All cases were planned and operated upon with the guided surgery technique. Results: A total of 122 implants were placed in 14 males and 5 females. The intraoperative surgical complications comprised a lack of primary stability, while the postoperative complications consisted of infections and a lack of implant osteointegration. Ten implants failed. The prosthetic complications in turn comprised loosening of the provisional prosthesis screws, prosthesis tooth fracture, and a lack of passive fit of the immediate prosthesis. The degree of patient satisfaction was evaluated using a verbal scale. Conclusions: Implant restoration with the guided surgery technique and immediate functional loading is a predictable procedure, provided patient selection and the surgical technique are adequate, affording lesser postoperative morbidity and increased patient satisfaction thanks to the immediate restoration of esthetics and function

Graft materials in oral surgery: revision

Oral implantology is a common procedure in dentistry, especially for fully or partially edentulous patients. The implants must be placed in the best location from both the aesthetic and functional point of view. Because of this it is increasingly more frequent to resort to regeneration techniques that use substitutes of the bone itself, in order to be able to insert the implants in the most appropriate location. Material and Methodology: A review was performed on the literature from the last ten years based on the following search limitations: "graft materials', 'allograft', 'xenograft', 'autologous graft" and 'dentistry". Results: 241 works were obtained that after reading their respective summaries, they were reduced to 38, and 9 previous works were included in order to summarize the concepts. Discussion: Autologous grafts are the 'gold standard' of the bone regeneration. They have obvious advantages, but they also have drawbacks. This is why allogeneic and xenogeneic tissues are used. The former because of their clear similarity with the recipient's tissue and the latter due to their wide availability. Given that these grafts also have drawbacks, the industry has developed synthetic materials that have properties similar to those of human bone tissue. However, as of today, the ideal material to substitute human bone has not yet been found. In recent years the tendency has been to combine these synthetic materials with the patient's own bone, which is extracted during drilling in implant placement, with bone marrow aspiration, or with bone morphogenetic proteins. Thus the intention is to equip these substances with the osteogenic capacity. Conclusions: There is currently no ideal graft material, with the exception of those materials that come directly from the patient. We hope that in the coming years we will have products that will allow us to perform rehabilitations with better results and provide a better quality of life for our patients, especially those who have more complex situations to resolve, like the patients that are operated on for head and neck cancer