Sinus window bone plates for Khoury technique, Part III

150 Rating(s).


Posted on By snjezana pohl In Bone Grafting

The case with bone resorption after Khoury technique for horizontal ridge augmentation is finished:))
Please, take a look at referral cases.
There was enough bone to place implants with simultaneous hard and soft tissue augmentation. CTG graft is used again at implant uncovering.
This case motivated my team and me to compare ridge volume gain utilizing bone plates from linea obliqua versus sinus window. Richard Martin joined us:) Statistics evaluation is in progress. When finished, we are going to do a video presentation for XP before publishing.




Add to Favorites
Add a comment to the discussion on Sinus window bone plates for Khoury technique, Part III


Upload photos
1.  Photo Title:

2.  Photo Title:

Would you like to follow this post?
Case has been added to your favorites.
Case has been removed from your favorites.
Thank you for your input. Your comment has been posted.
You are now following this member. You will get notified on any new topics posted by this member.
You are no longer following this member. You will not get notified on any new topics posted by this member.
Edit Comment
1.  Photo Title:
Current Image:   Delete Image
2.  Photo Title:
Current Image:   Delete Image
Comment has been updated.

16 Comments


Reply


Reply

Interesting, innovative approach Snjezana! I look forward to see the video. Congrats to you and your team!


Reply

Thank you, dear Enzo!
See you in Madrid at JTI!
Cheers
Snjezana


Reply

I like your case Snjezana and that you are performing a research and studies for viability of plate of sinus anterior wall for reconstruction Great!! please tell us the results. thank you
regards
Vladimir


Reply

This is a link for Part II of this case, somehow I can`t manage to add it.

http://forum.dentalxp.com/case/details/sinus-access-window-bone-khoury-techniq/6274


Reply

Impressive technique and amazing surgical skill, Thanks for sharing.


Reply

Thank you very much, dear Professor Moussa!
Best regards
Snjezana


Reply

Such impressive and complete therapies. What do suppose was the reason behind the resorption seen with standard Khoury protocol? Thanks for sharing and see you soon in MAdrid and then Florida. warmest regards Maurice


Reply

At first I blamed sinus window bone plates. I presumed that their mechanical properties are not good enough to resist the pressure.
But than I realized that provisional teeth were too long. Impression was taken before bone augmentation, the temporary bridge in contact with atrophic alveolar ridge. I haven`t seen the patient with provisional, until she came for implant placement.
It`s difficult to say if the same would have happened with bone plates from linea obliqua. For this reason we are comparing 25 cases done with sinus window versus 25 cases done with linea obliqua plates.
Sinus window bone plates are easy to harvest, handling is great. This procedure is beneficial especially for patients requiring both sinus floor elevation and ridge augmentation.
I am so excited to be in Madrid and Florida and see you and all my friends!
warmly
Snjezana


Reply

Snjezana one more amazing case! I am really looking forward to see the results of your study!!!
Ramus plate and sinus window plate have different embryologic origin and this could affect the outcome...? It does in new zealand rabbits (worked on it in my thesis) but not sure for humans :)
Anyhow I think it is worth looking into it when you interpretep your data/results.
Hugs
Ioannis


Reply

Thank you for your valuable input, dear Ioannis.
We already talked about it (I think Richard Martin opened the topic) and we are searching the literature for it.
Is there any possibility to get your research on rabbits?
Best regards
Snjezana


Reply

I submit here the conclusions we made and I will email you the article that unfortunately I never published :((

(New Zealand rabbits)

Conclusions: There was no difference in pattern and type of new bone formation between the three different types of defects. Tibia defects appeared to have more osteogenic potential compared to Zygoma and Calvarium defects.


Reply

I just want to be part of the general applause for this case. One has to be a "GENERAL" surgeon to Master such varieties of techniques displayed here. Thanks again for posting
Jorge


Reply

Snjezana,

Nice work- thank you for recognition. Remember what my thoughts were about the resorption and way to minimize?

I will miss Madrid but see you in Florida

Cheers,

Richard


Reply

Yes, Rich, let‘s see what statistics say!
Meanwhile I‘m reading literature about bone geaft success depending on tissue origin. It looks like „Same to same“. And here we are!
Cheers
Snjezana


Reply

Related Posts

112 Rating(s)
209 Rating(s)

BioHorizons
KLS Martin