RESUMEN
PURPOSE: This preliminary study aimed to assess the efficacy of zygomatic buttress bone grafting for nasal floor augmentation in patients with a unilateral alveolar cleft who were referred after the optimal timetable for this surgery had elapsed. CASE SERIES: Five patients, aged 12-18 years, with unilateral alveolar clefts were treated at Qaem Hospital, Mashhad, Iran. Initially, a mucous layer was established on the side of the cleft nose, followed by forming a bony bridge between the defect's sides through a bone graft derived from the zygomatic buttress and xenograft bone powder. Subsequently, the grafted region was covered with an absorbable collagen membrane, and the oral-side flap was sealed. Post-operative follow-ups occurred at 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months, and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) was performed 6 months post-treatment. Discrepancy between the anterior edge height of the pyriform aperture on the healthy and cleft sides post-grafting was assessed. The average disparity between the height of the anterior edge of the pyriform aperture on the healthy side and the peak height achieved post-grafting on the cleft side was 1.90 ± 2.82 mm. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of the study, it seems that zygomatic buttress is applicable for late unilateral alveolar bone grafting as an intraoral source, and is helpful in symmetric bony nasal floor reconstruction, with a good success rate.
RESUMEN
Aim: To systematically review the existing scientific literature, to summarize and assess the efficacy of the nasal floor augmentation on the survival rate of dental implants by systematically reviewing the available literature. Methodology: Review was performed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines and registered in PROSPERO-CRD42027289143. Electronic databases like PubMed, google scholar and Ebsco Host were searched from 2000 to December 2021 for studies reporting efficacy of nasal floor augmentation and reporting outcomes in terms of survival rates of dental implants. Quality assessment of included comparative follow-up studies was done using the critical checklist put forward by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) was used. Results: Only nine studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included in the qualitative synthesis. Of those nine studies, five were case reports and four comparative follow-up studies. A total of 14 implants were placed in five patients with a survival rate of 100% in included case reports, while a total of 408 implants were placed in 130 patients with survival rates ranging from 89% to 100% in included comparative follow-up studies. No complications were observed during follow-ups, and the patients were satisfied with the functional and aesthetic results of the treatment. Quality assessment of included studies showed moderate to low risk of bias with overall high quality of studies. Conclusion: The results of this systematic review indicate that implant placement by nasal floor augmentation techniques can be considered as a predictable treatment modality. However, due to the scarcity of literature, more studies should be carried out on proving the efficacy of nasal floor augmentation on survival rate or success of dental Implants.
RESUMEN
The aim of this work is to assess the clinical outcomes of implants placed after a nasal floor elevation procedure. A systematic review was conducted using 4 electronic databases: MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Library, Directory of Open Access Journals, and Scopus, following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews) statement recommendations to answer the PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) question: "In patients undergoing dental implant placement in the maxillary anterior region (P), Do implants placed after nasal floor elevation (I) have a different survival (O) from those implants placed without grafting procedures (C)? The study was pre-registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021229479). Included article quality was assessed using the "NIH quality assessment tool", "The Newcastle-Ottawa scale," and "JBI critical appraisal tools for case reports." Twelve articles were finally selected, including 151 patients and 460 implants. The weighted mean follow-up was 32.2 months, and the weighted survival rate after this period was 97.64% (range: 89.2%-100%). No statistical differences could be inferred between the treatments performed in 1- or 2-stage, following a lateral approach or a transcrestal approach or using different grafting materials. A great heterogeneity was found in study design and methodological aspects. For this reason, a quantitative analysis followed by meta-analysis was not possible. Within the limitations of this study, implants placed after a nasal floor elevation present a good survival and a low range of complications. In absence of randomized studies, the level of evidence was low, attending the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) system and based on the study quality level, the strength of evidence attending the SORT (Strength Of Recommendation Taxonomy) was B.