PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 1061693

Osseous surgery--how much need we compromise?

Abstract

It is essential that the execution and results of osseous surgery be carefully analyzed. Perhaps the two most compelling reasons are (1) that we should understand the effects on tooth mobility and their implications for complex restorative dentistry, and (2) to facilitate the accurate assessment of postoperative "success," bearing in mind not only improvement of the environment, but also increased chances of survival for the operated teeth. We have discussed the effects of osseous surgery on tooth mobility. In the light of recent information, a more accurate assessment of the need for splinting can be made. There has always been some controversy about osseous recontouring. Of late, there has been a particular resurgence of scepticism as to the efficacy of osseous resective procedures compared with more conservative forms of therapy. Scientific investigation demands the doubting mind and the analytical approach in order to establish the truth or fallacy of current ideas. This approach is essential to the continued existence of periodontics as a clinical science. These investigations should be based on a full understanding of the therapeutic measures being investigated, as it is misleading to assess the results of a procedure when that procedure is either not used to its full advantage or inappropriately used. It is hoped that these comments will be helpful in deciding whether definitive osseous correction in a given case is desirable or possible, in terms of both bone removal and permanent splinting. The author also hopes that this article has served to enhance the possibilities of more complete osseous correction when indicated, in order to achieve minimal pocket depths, and to permit proper comparison with other modes of periodontal therapy. It is, however, crucial to realize that whatever modality of therapy utilized, it is merely one phase in the treatment spectrum. Maintaining a stable state for the patient over many years is the ultimate goal, beside which any given technical procedure pales in significance. Periodontal therapy is an ongoing process in which patient recall plays a central role.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

H Selipsky. 1976. Osseous surgery--how much need we compromise?. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1061693/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Canine impactions: incidence and management.

Impacted teeth present many problems for the orthodontist. They can compromise tooth movement, esthetics, and functional outcomes. The second most commonly impacted tooth, after the maxillary third molar, is the maxillary canine, with an incidence from 1% to 2.5%. Maxillary canines can be impacted facially or palatally and are more common in female patients than in male patients. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to address the incidence and etiology associated with impacted maxillary canines, the clinical and radiographic evaluation of the situation, and the techniques for managing this problem. Papers related to this topic were identified and reviewed thoroughly. A decision tree involving the various techniques employed to expose impacted canines is presented, together with methods used to identify the location of impacted canines. The impacted canine can be properly managed with proper diagnosis and technique.

Alveolectomy↗

Lingual flap retraction for third molar removal.

PURPOSE: Lingual nerve damage following lower third molar surgery remains a clinical problem. The traditional approach in the United States has been a buccal approach avoiding exposure or surgery on the lingual side of the crest of the ridge. An alternative technique is to deliberately expose the lingual tissues and retract the lingual nerve lingually before tooth removal. This study reports a trial of this technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients had removal of their lower third molars carried out using a technique that raises a lingual flap in addition to a buccal flap and places a specially designed lingual retractor to ensure that the lingual nerve is held out of the surgical field. This technique was used in cases where the crown of the tooth had to be sectioned or when distal bone needed to be removed. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty patients were treated by this method. There were 4 cases of transient lingual paresthesia, presumably caused by traction pressure from the retractor. Three of these cases were mild and resolved within 3 weeks. The fourth case had more profound paresthesia, but still resolved within 2 months. There were no cases of permanent nerve damage, and in many cases removal of the third molar was simplified by the superior access. CONCLUSION: Lingual retraction for third molar removal improves access to the surgical site and can simplify third molar removal. In this prospective study there were no cases of permanent lingual nerve injury.

Alveolectomy↗

Transurgical restoration in the absence of attached gingiva. A case report.

A 45-year-old woman needing a Class V restoration in a mandibular molar without attached gingiva is presented. In an interdisciplinary intervention, transurgical restoration was accomplished, including flap surgery with a slight ostectomy and restoration with a bonding system and a resin composite. A 1-year clinical evaluation showed satisfactory marginal adaptation and restoration contour associated to gingival tissue health.

Alveolectomy↗