OBJECTIVE: To study the application of dental implant distractor (DID) in mandibular functional reconstruction. METHODS: We designed a new device named DID, which includes the permanent dental implant and the temporar...OBJECTIVE: To study the application of dental implant distractor (DID) in mandibular functional reconstruction. METHODS: We designed a new device named DID, which includes the permanent dental implant and the temporary distractor in itself. It is specially designed for fibula wider distraction in mandible reconstruction. Twenty-five sets of DID devices were put into 8 patients (6 men and 2 women) during operation. Two patients suffered from ameloblastoma of the mandible, 2 from odontogenic cyst of the mandible, 1 from fibrous dysplasia, and the other 3 from malignant tumor of the mandible. The age of 8 patients ranged from 19 to 67 (mean 46.8) years. RESULTS: During postoperative 2 - 15 months follow up, 7 patients were found to be successful. The clinical examination and X-ray film showed the normal shape of the mandible and the osteointegration of the implants were solid enough to withstand the denture force. Others had the DID removed because of inflammation. Two of the patients successfully worn the fixed dental prosthesis. The outcomes was satisfying. CONCLUSION: The DID device specially designed for mandibular reconstruction with fibular flap can help to simplify convenient procedures to a single surgery.展开更多
文摘OBJECTIVE: To study the application of dental implant distractor (DID) in mandibular functional reconstruction. METHODS: We designed a new device named DID, which includes the permanent dental implant and the temporary distractor in itself. It is specially designed for fibula wider distraction in mandible reconstruction. Twenty-five sets of DID devices were put into 8 patients (6 men and 2 women) during operation. Two patients suffered from ameloblastoma of the mandible, 2 from odontogenic cyst of the mandible, 1 from fibrous dysplasia, and the other 3 from malignant tumor of the mandible. The age of 8 patients ranged from 19 to 67 (mean 46.8) years. RESULTS: During postoperative 2 - 15 months follow up, 7 patients were found to be successful. The clinical examination and X-ray film showed the normal shape of the mandible and the osteointegration of the implants were solid enough to withstand the denture force. Others had the DID removed because of inflammation. Two of the patients successfully worn the fixed dental prosthesis. The outcomes was satisfying. CONCLUSION: The DID device specially designed for mandibular reconstruction with fibular flap can help to simplify convenient procedures to a single surgery.
