Clinical evaluation on four kinds of reconstruction of mandibular defect

HE San-hu,BAI Xiu-feng,LI Gang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1672-4992.2007.09.010
2007-01-01
Journal of Modern Oncology
Abstract:Objective:To compare autoallergic boiled bone returnvariant,allogenic freeze bone transplantation,prepared titanium frame and individual titanium mandibular, four kinds of restorative procedure for reconstruct mandibular defect in outline form,functional restoration and postoperative complications. Mathods: To collect collect 122 cases applied four kinds of restorative procedures in our hospital from 1997 to 2005. Male 63 cases, female 59 cases, age 16~78, average 42.7 to compare outline form and functional recovery. Results: Featural and functional evaluation band good: autoallergic boiled bone returnvariant (group A) 90.4%, allogenic freeze bone transplantation (group B) 7.1%, prepared titanium frame (group C)18.2%, individual titanium mandibular (group D)100% ,group A and group D were better than group B and group C(P<0.05). Featural evaluation band good: group A and group D were better than group B and group C(P<0.05).Infection rate: group A 7.5%, group B 14.3%, group C 11.9%, group D 0, no significant difference (P>0.05). Fragmentation rate : group A 5%, group B 42.9%, group C 19.0%, group D0 , no significant difference(P>0.05).Conclusion:The ways of autoallergic boiled bone returnvariant and individual titanium mandibular are batter than allogenic freeze bone transplantation and prepared titanium frame; The four kinds of restorative procedures of mandibular defect are no significant difference on complications.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?