Efficacy of panoramic radiographs in the preoperative planning of posterior mandibular implants: a prospective clinical study of 1527 consecutively treated patients

OBJECTIVES: Various imaging techniques, including conventional radiography and computed tomography, are proposed to localize the mandibular canal prior to implant surgery. The aim of this study is to determine the incidence of altered mental nerve sensation after implant placement in the posterior segment of the mandible when a panoramic radiograph is the only preoperative imaging technique used. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study included 1527 partially and totally edentulous patients who had consecutively received 2584 implants in the posterior segment of the mandible. Preoperative bone height was evaluated from the top of the alveolar crest to the superior border of the mandibular canal on a standard panoramic radiograph. A graduated implant scale from the implant manufacturer was used and 2 mm were subtracted as a safety margin to determine the length of the implant to be inserted. RESULTS: No permanent sensory disturbances of the inferior alveolar nerve were observed. There were two cases of postoperative paresthesia, representing 2/2584 (0.08%) of implants inserted in the posterior segment of the mandible or 2/1527 (0.13%) of patients. These sensory disturbances were minor, lasted for 3 and 6 weeks and resolved spontaneously. CONCLUSIONS: Panoramic examination can be considered a safe preoperative evaluation procedure for routine posterior mandibular implant placement. Panoramic radiography is a quick, simple, low-cost and low-dose presurgical diagnostic tool. When a safety margin of at least 2 mm above the mandibular canal is respected, panoramic radiography appears to be sufficient to evaluate available bone height prior to insertion of posterior mandibular implants; cross-sectional imaging techniques may not be necessary.

Clinical and haemodynamic outcomes in 658 patients receiving the Perceval sutureless aortic valve: early results from a prospective European multicentre study (the Cavalier Trial)†.

OBJECTIVES The aim of the Cavalier trial was to evaluate the safety and performance of the Perceval sutureless aortic valve in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR). We report the 30-day clinical and haemodynamic outcomes from the largest study cohort with a sutureless valve. METHODS From February 2010 to September 2013, 658 consecutive patients (mean age 77.8 years; 64.4% females; mean logistic EuroSCORE 10.2%) underwent AVR in 25 European Centres. Isolated AVRs were performed in 451 (68.5%) patients with a less invasive approach in 219 (33.3%) cases. Of the total, 40.0% were octogenarians. Congenital bicuspid aortic valve was considered an exclusion criterion. RESULTS Implantation was successful in 628 patients (95.4%). In isolated AVR through sternotomy, the mean cross-clamp time and the cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time were 32.6 and 53.7 min, and with the less invasive approach 38.8 and 64.5 min, respectively. The 30-day overall and valve-related mortality rates were 3.7 and 0.5%, respectively. Valve explants, stroke and endocarditis occurred in 0.6, 2.1 and in 0.1% of cases, respectively. Preoperative mean and peak pressure gradients decreased from 44.8 and 73.24 mmHg to 10.24 and 19.27 mmHg at discharge, respectively. The mean effective orifice area improved from 0.72 to 1.46 cm(2). CONCLUSIONS The current 30-day results show that the Perceval valve is safe (favourable haemodynamic effect and low complication rate), and can be implanted with a fast and reproducible technique after a short learning period. Short cross-clamp and CPB times were achieved in both isolated and combined procedures. The Perceval valve represents a promising alternative to biological AVR, especially with a less invasive approach and in older patients.