Piezoelectric alveolar ridge-splitting technique with simultaneous implant placement: a cohort study with 2-year radiographic results

PURPOSE Extended grafting procedures in atrophic ridges are invasive and time-consuming and increase cost and patient morbidity. Therefore, ridge-splitting techniques have been suggested to enlarge alveolar crests. The aim of this cohort study was to report techniques and radiographic outcomes of implants placed simultaneously with a piezoelectric alveolar ridge-splitting technique (RST). Peri-implant bone-level changes (ΔIBL) of implants placed with (study group, SG) or without RST (control group, CG) were compared. MATERIALS AND METHODS Two cohorts (seven patients in each) were matched regarding implant type, position, and number; superstructure type; age; and gender and received 17 implants each. Crestal implant bone level (IBL) was measured at surgery (T0), loading (T1), and 1 year (T2) and 2 years after loading (T3). For all implants, ΔIBL values were determined from radiographs. Differences in ΔIBL between SG and CG were analyzed statistically (Mann-Whitney U test). Bone width was assessed intraoperatively, and vertical bone mapping was performed at T0, T1, and T3. RESULTS After a mean observation period of 27.4 months after surgery, the implant survival rate was 100%. Mean ΔIBL was -1.68 ± 0.90 mm for SG and -1.04 ± 0.78 mm for CG (P = .022). Increased ΔIBL in SG versus CG occurred mainly until T2. Between T2 and T3, ΔIBL was limited (-0.11 ± 1.20 mm for SG and -0.05 ± 0.16 mm for CG; P = .546). Median bone width increased intraoperatively by 4.7 mm. CONCLUSIONS Within the limitations of this study, it can be suggested that RST is a well-functioning one-stage alternative to extended grafting procedures if the ridge shows adequate height. ΔIBL values indicated that implants with RST may fulfill accepted implant success criteria. However, during healing and the first year of loading, increased IBL alterations must be anticipated.

Temporary anchorage device usage: a survey among Swiss orthodontists.

BACKGROUND The aim of the survey was to obtain information on the treatment plan preferences, mechanics and characteristics of temporary anchorage device (TAD) application using a single case presented to orthodontists in Switzerland. METHODS A structured questionnaire to be completed by all study participants with case-specific (treatment plan including mechanics and TAD usage) and general questions (general fixed appliance and TAD usage as well as professional, educational and demographic questions) together with an orthodontic borderline case was utilised. The case was a female adult with dental Class II/2, deep bite and maxillary anterior crowing, who had been treated in childhood with extraction of four premolars and fixed appliance followed by wisdom tooth extraction. RESULTS The response rate was 24.4% (108 out of 443). The majority (96.3%, 104) proposed comprehensive treatment, while 3.7% (4) planned only alignment of maxillary teeth. 8.3% (9) included a surgical approach in their treatment plan. An additional 0.9% (1) combined the surgical approach with Class II mechanics. 75.1% (81) decided on distalization on the maxilla using TADs, 7.4% (8) planned various types of Class II appliances and 3.7% (4) combined distalization using TADs or headgear with Class II appliances and surgery. Palatal implants were the most popular choice (70.6%, 60), followed by mini-screws (22.4%, 19) and mini-plates on the infrazygomatic crests (7.0%, 6). The preferred site of TAD insertion showed more variation in sagittal than in transversal dimension, and the median size of mini-screws used was 10.0-mm long (interquartile range (IQR) 2.3 mm) and 2.0-mm wide (IQR 0.3 mm). CONCLUSIONS Distalization against palatal implants and then distalization against mini-screws were the most popular treatment plans. Preferred site for TAD insertion varied depending on type and size but varied more widely in the sagittal than in the transversal dimension.