Buccal fat pad versus sandwich graft for treatment of oroantral defects: A comparison
To compare the efficacy of buccal fat pad (BFP) graft with sandwich graft (hydroxyapatite crystals embedded within collagen sheath) in closure of oroantral defects. A 2-year prospective study was conducted; 20 patients were included in the study were divided into two groups having 10 patients in eac...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | National journal of maxillofacial surgery 2010-01, Vol.1 (1), p.6-14 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 14 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 6 |
| container_title | National journal of maxillofacial surgery |
| container_volume | 1 |
| creator | Hariram Pal, U S Mohammad, Shadab Singh, R K Singh, Gaurav Malkunje, Laxman R |
| description | To compare the efficacy of buccal fat pad (BFP) graft with sandwich graft (hydroxyapatite crystals embedded within collagen sheath) in closure of oroantral defects.
A 2-year prospective study was conducted; 20 patients were included in the study were divided into two groups having 10 patients in each. Group I patients underwent surgical closure of oroantral fistula with sandwich graft and Group II patients with buccal pad of fat.
In Group I, the mean pain scores were 7.60 ± 0.84, 3.90 ± 1.10, 2.30 ± 1.16, 1.10 ± 0.99 and 0.40 ± 0.70 at immediate post-op., 1, 3, 6 and 12 week time intervals, respectively, whereas in Group II these were 7.30 ± 0.67, 3.50 ± 0.53, 1.70 ± 0.48, 1.00 ± 0.47 and 0.30 ± 0.48, respectively, at the corresponding time intervals. In Group I, swelling was seen to be present in 10 (100%), 7 (70%), 2 (20%) and nil (0%) patients at 1, 3, 6 and 12 weeks, respectively, whereas in Group II, it was seen to be present in 10 (100%), 10 (100%), 2 (20%) and nil (0%) patients at the corresponding time intervals. At 1 week, infection was seen to be present in 1 (10%) patient of Group I and 2 (20%) patients of Group II. At 3 and 6 weeks, infection was seen to be present in 1 (10%) patient of Group I and none of the patients of group II. No radiologic evidence of bone formation was seen in either group up to 1 week. At 3 week interval, there were 6 (60%) patients in Group I and nil (0%) in Group II showing bone formation, thus showing a statistically significant difference between the two groups. By 6 week time interval, radiologic evidence of bone formation was seen in 9 (90%) patients of Group I but in no patients of Group II, thereby showing a statistically very highly significant (P < 0.001) difference between the two groups. In Group I, in 1 (10%) patient, graft was rejected by first week; however, no further graft rejection took place. In Group II, no case of graft rejection was reported.
The sandwich graft technique yielded a more promising closure of oroantral communication by provision of a more biologically apt base in terms of regeneration of lost bone structure at the floor of the maxillary sinus. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.4103/0975-5950.69148 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3304177</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A237532005</galeid><sourcerecordid>A237532005</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4018-db6a40e84d67c8de46a3380c1a8469ae36319eb8cb20d85c351f5f6aee238603</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkt1rFDEUxYModql99k0Cgj7NNl8zm_ggrEWrUPClPoe7mZvdyMxkTTIt_vfOdNulCyYPgdzfOfk4l5C3nC0VZ_KSmVVd1aZmy8ZwpV-QhRDCVFJx_ZIsjtUzcpHzbzYNZTg3_DU5E0IpUSuxIL--jM5BRz0UuoeW3mHKY6YZhvY-uB3dJvCF-phoSQilx6HQ6GlMEYaSJmGLHl3Jn-iautjvIYUchzfklYcu48Xjek5uv329vfpe3fy8_nG1vqmcYlxX7aYBxVCrtlk53aJqQErNHAetGgMoG8kNbrTbCNbq2sma-9o3gCikbpg8J58Ptvtx02Pr8OFKdp9CD-mvjRDsaWUIO7uNd1ZKpvhqNRl8fDRI8c-Iudg-ZIddBwPGMVujtDZcm_mo9wdyCx3aMPg4GbqZtmshV7UUjNUTtfwPNc0W--DigD5M-yeCD88EO4Su7HLsxhLikE_BywPoUsw5oT--kjM7d4Od87Zz3vahGybFu-efc-Sfspf_AEpcrbw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>948891890</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Buccal fat pad versus sandwich graft for treatment of oroantral defects: A comparison</title><source>Medknow Open Access Medical Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Hariram ; Pal, U S ; Mohammad, Shadab ; Singh, R K ; Singh, Gaurav ; Malkunje, Laxman R</creator><creatorcontrib>Hariram ; Pal, U S ; Mohammad, Shadab ; Singh, R K ; Singh, Gaurav ; Malkunje, Laxman R</creatorcontrib><description>To compare the efficacy of buccal fat pad (BFP) graft with sandwich graft (hydroxyapatite crystals embedded within collagen sheath) in closure of oroantral defects.
A 2-year prospective study was conducted; 20 patients were included in the study were divided into two groups having 10 patients in each. Group I patients underwent surgical closure of oroantral fistula with sandwich graft and Group II patients with buccal pad of fat.
In Group I, the mean pain scores were 7.60 ± 0.84, 3.90 ± 1.10, 2.30 ± 1.16, 1.10 ± 0.99 and 0.40 ± 0.70 at immediate post-op., 1, 3, 6 and 12 week time intervals, respectively, whereas in Group II these were 7.30 ± 0.67, 3.50 ± 0.53, 1.70 ± 0.48, 1.00 ± 0.47 and 0.30 ± 0.48, respectively, at the corresponding time intervals. In Group I, swelling was seen to be present in 10 (100%), 7 (70%), 2 (20%) and nil (0%) patients at 1, 3, 6 and 12 weeks, respectively, whereas in Group II, it was seen to be present in 10 (100%), 10 (100%), 2 (20%) and nil (0%) patients at the corresponding time intervals. At 1 week, infection was seen to be present in 1 (10%) patient of Group I and 2 (20%) patients of Group II. At 3 and 6 weeks, infection was seen to be present in 1 (10%) patient of Group I and none of the patients of group II. No radiologic evidence of bone formation was seen in either group up to 1 week. At 3 week interval, there were 6 (60%) patients in Group I and nil (0%) in Group II showing bone formation, thus showing a statistically significant difference between the two groups. By 6 week time interval, radiologic evidence of bone formation was seen in 9 (90%) patients of Group I but in no patients of Group II, thereby showing a statistically very highly significant (P < 0.001) difference between the two groups. In Group I, in 1 (10%) patient, graft was rejected by first week; however, no further graft rejection took place. In Group II, no case of graft rejection was reported.
The sandwich graft technique yielded a more promising closure of oroantral communication by provision of a more biologically apt base in terms of regeneration of lost bone structure at the floor of the maxillary sinus.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0975-5950</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2229-3418</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.4103/0975-5950.69148</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22442542</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>India: Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd</publisher><subject>Care and treatment ; Comparative analysis ; Diagnosis ; Methods ; Oral surgery ; Original ; Stomatognathic diseases ; Transplantation of organs, tissues, etc</subject><ispartof>National journal of maxillofacial surgery, 2010-01, Vol.1 (1), p.6-14</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2010 Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright: © National Journal of Maxillofacial Surgery 2010</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4018-db6a40e84d67c8de46a3380c1a8469ae36319eb8cb20d85c351f5f6aee238603</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3304177/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3304177/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,4024,27923,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22442542$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hariram</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pal, U S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mohammad, Shadab</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singh, R K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singh, Gaurav</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Malkunje, Laxman R</creatorcontrib><title>Buccal fat pad versus sandwich graft for treatment of oroantral defects: A comparison</title><title>National journal of maxillofacial surgery</title><addtitle>Natl J Maxillofac Surg</addtitle><description>To compare the efficacy of buccal fat pad (BFP) graft with sandwich graft (hydroxyapatite crystals embedded within collagen sheath) in closure of oroantral defects.
A 2-year prospective study was conducted; 20 patients were included in the study were divided into two groups having 10 patients in each. Group I patients underwent surgical closure of oroantral fistula with sandwich graft and Group II patients with buccal pad of fat.
In Group I, the mean pain scores were 7.60 ± 0.84, 3.90 ± 1.10, 2.30 ± 1.16, 1.10 ± 0.99 and 0.40 ± 0.70 at immediate post-op., 1, 3, 6 and 12 week time intervals, respectively, whereas in Group II these were 7.30 ± 0.67, 3.50 ± 0.53, 1.70 ± 0.48, 1.00 ± 0.47 and 0.30 ± 0.48, respectively, at the corresponding time intervals. In Group I, swelling was seen to be present in 10 (100%), 7 (70%), 2 (20%) and nil (0%) patients at 1, 3, 6 and 12 weeks, respectively, whereas in Group II, it was seen to be present in 10 (100%), 10 (100%), 2 (20%) and nil (0%) patients at the corresponding time intervals. At 1 week, infection was seen to be present in 1 (10%) patient of Group I and 2 (20%) patients of Group II. At 3 and 6 weeks, infection was seen to be present in 1 (10%) patient of Group I and none of the patients of group II. No radiologic evidence of bone formation was seen in either group up to 1 week. At 3 week interval, there were 6 (60%) patients in Group I and nil (0%) in Group II showing bone formation, thus showing a statistically significant difference between the two groups. By 6 week time interval, radiologic evidence of bone formation was seen in 9 (90%) patients of Group I but in no patients of Group II, thereby showing a statistically very highly significant (P < 0.001) difference between the two groups. In Group I, in 1 (10%) patient, graft was rejected by first week; however, no further graft rejection took place. In Group II, no case of graft rejection was reported.
The sandwich graft technique yielded a more promising closure of oroantral communication by provision of a more biologically apt base in terms of regeneration of lost bone structure at the floor of the maxillary sinus.</description><subject>Care and treatment</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Diagnosis</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Oral surgery</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>Stomatognathic diseases</subject><subject>Transplantation of organs, tissues, etc</subject><issn>0975-5950</issn><issn>2229-3418</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNptkt1rFDEUxYModql99k0Cgj7NNl8zm_ggrEWrUPClPoe7mZvdyMxkTTIt_vfOdNulCyYPgdzfOfk4l5C3nC0VZ_KSmVVd1aZmy8ZwpV-QhRDCVFJx_ZIsjtUzcpHzbzYNZTg3_DU5E0IpUSuxIL--jM5BRz0UuoeW3mHKY6YZhvY-uB3dJvCF-phoSQilx6HQ6GlMEYaSJmGLHl3Jn-iautjvIYUchzfklYcu48Xjek5uv329vfpe3fy8_nG1vqmcYlxX7aYBxVCrtlk53aJqQErNHAetGgMoG8kNbrTbCNbq2sma-9o3gCikbpg8J58Ptvtx02Pr8OFKdp9CD-mvjRDsaWUIO7uNd1ZKpvhqNRl8fDRI8c-Iudg-ZIddBwPGMVujtDZcm_mo9wdyCx3aMPg4GbqZtmshV7UUjNUTtfwPNc0W--DigD5M-yeCD88EO4Su7HLsxhLikE_BywPoUsw5oT--kjM7d4Od87Zz3vahGybFu-efc-Sfspf_AEpcrbw</recordid><startdate>201001</startdate><enddate>201001</enddate><creator>Hariram</creator><creator>Pal, U S</creator><creator>Mohammad, Shadab</creator><creator>Singh, R K</creator><creator>Singh, Gaurav</creator><creator>Malkunje, Laxman R</creator><general>Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd</general><general>Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201001</creationdate><title>Buccal fat pad versus sandwich graft for treatment of oroantral defects: A comparison</title><author>Hariram ; Pal, U S ; Mohammad, Shadab ; Singh, R K ; Singh, Gaurav ; Malkunje, Laxman R</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4018-db6a40e84d67c8de46a3380c1a8469ae36319eb8cb20d85c351f5f6aee238603</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>Care and treatment</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Diagnosis</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Oral surgery</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>Stomatognathic diseases</topic><topic>Transplantation of organs, tissues, etc</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hariram</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pal, U S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mohammad, Shadab</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singh, R K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singh, Gaurav</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Malkunje, Laxman R</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>National journal of maxillofacial surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hariram</au><au>Pal, U S</au><au>Mohammad, Shadab</au><au>Singh, R K</au><au>Singh, Gaurav</au><au>Malkunje, Laxman R</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Buccal fat pad versus sandwich graft for treatment of oroantral defects: A comparison</atitle><jtitle>National journal of maxillofacial surgery</jtitle><addtitle>Natl J Maxillofac Surg</addtitle><date>2010-01</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>1</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>6</spage><epage>14</epage><pages>6-14</pages><issn>0975-5950</issn><eissn>2229-3418</eissn><abstract>To compare the efficacy of buccal fat pad (BFP) graft with sandwich graft (hydroxyapatite crystals embedded within collagen sheath) in closure of oroantral defects.
A 2-year prospective study was conducted; 20 patients were included in the study were divided into two groups having 10 patients in each. Group I patients underwent surgical closure of oroantral fistula with sandwich graft and Group II patients with buccal pad of fat.
In Group I, the mean pain scores were 7.60 ± 0.84, 3.90 ± 1.10, 2.30 ± 1.16, 1.10 ± 0.99 and 0.40 ± 0.70 at immediate post-op., 1, 3, 6 and 12 week time intervals, respectively, whereas in Group II these were 7.30 ± 0.67, 3.50 ± 0.53, 1.70 ± 0.48, 1.00 ± 0.47 and 0.30 ± 0.48, respectively, at the corresponding time intervals. In Group I, swelling was seen to be present in 10 (100%), 7 (70%), 2 (20%) and nil (0%) patients at 1, 3, 6 and 12 weeks, respectively, whereas in Group II, it was seen to be present in 10 (100%), 10 (100%), 2 (20%) and nil (0%) patients at the corresponding time intervals. At 1 week, infection was seen to be present in 1 (10%) patient of Group I and 2 (20%) patients of Group II. At 3 and 6 weeks, infection was seen to be present in 1 (10%) patient of Group I and none of the patients of group II. No radiologic evidence of bone formation was seen in either group up to 1 week. At 3 week interval, there were 6 (60%) patients in Group I and nil (0%) in Group II showing bone formation, thus showing a statistically significant difference between the two groups. By 6 week time interval, radiologic evidence of bone formation was seen in 9 (90%) patients of Group I but in no patients of Group II, thereby showing a statistically very highly significant (P < 0.001) difference between the two groups. In Group I, in 1 (10%) patient, graft was rejected by first week; however, no further graft rejection took place. In Group II, no case of graft rejection was reported.
The sandwich graft technique yielded a more promising closure of oroantral communication by provision of a more biologically apt base in terms of regeneration of lost bone structure at the floor of the maxillary sinus.</abstract><cop>India</cop><pub>Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd</pub><pmid>22442542</pmid><doi>10.4103/0975-5950.69148</doi><tpages>9</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0975-5950 |
| ispartof | National journal of maxillofacial surgery, 2010-01, Vol.1 (1), p.6-14 |
| issn | 0975-5950 2229-3418 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3304177 |
| source | Medknow Open Access Medical Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central Open Access; PubMed Central |
| subjects | Care and treatment Comparative analysis Diagnosis Methods Oral surgery Original Stomatognathic diseases Transplantation of organs, tissues, etc |
| title | Buccal fat pad versus sandwich graft for treatment of oroantral defects: A comparison |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T16%3A02%3A34IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Buccal%20fat%20pad%20versus%20sandwich%20graft%20for%20treatment%20of%20oroantral%20defects:%20A%20comparison&rft.jtitle=National%20journal%20of%20maxillofacial%20surgery&rft.au=Hariram&rft.date=2010-01&rft.volume=1&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=6&rft.epage=14&rft.pages=6-14&rft.issn=0975-5950&rft.eissn=2229-3418&rft_id=info:doi/10.4103/0975-5950.69148&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA237532005%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=948891890&rft_id=info:pmid/22442542&rft_galeid=A237532005&rfr_iscdi=true |