To compare the radiographic success rates of alveolar bone grafts (ABG) performed using bone harvested from the mandibular symphysis (MS) or the anterior iliac crest (IC). The null hypothesis was that the outcomes would be similar for both groups, regardless of the timing of surgery.
Design
Retrospective cohort study with consecutive sampling of 144 periapical radiographs taken 12 months after surgery.
Setting
A single tertiary craniofacial center.
Participants
One hundred forty-four patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) and a median age of 14 years were divided into 2 groups according to the donor site.
Interventions
A standardized surgical technique was used in the 144 recipient sites. Radiographic outcomes of ABG were classified as success or failure by three blinded evaluators based on the modified Bergland scale.
Main Outcome Measures
The primary outcome was the radiographic success rate according to the grafting material. Intra- and interrater reliability was evaluated using Kappa statistics. The Mann–Whitney test was applied to compare intergroup age medians. Intergroup comparison of bone graft success rates was performed using the chi-square test (P < .05).
Results
There was no statistically significant difference in patient age at grafting between the MS and IC groups (P = .116). Both groups had success rate above 90%, with no significant difference between them (P = .190).
Conclusion
ABG using the MS donor site is a viable option for patients with complete UCLP.
BoynePJSandsNR. Secondary bone grafting of residual alveolar and palatal clefts. J Oral Surgery. 1972;30(2):87-92.
2.
AbyholmFEBerglandOSembG. Secondary bone grafting of alveolar clefts. A surgical/orthodontic treatment enabling a non-prosthodontic rehabilitation in cleft lip and palate patients. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg. 1981;15(2):127-140.
3.
Filho OGSJúnior FMFFilho LCAlbuquerqueMVP. Enxerto o ósseo alveolar em pacientes fissurados: Realidade e perspectivas [in Portuguese]. Ortodontia. 1995;28(1):34-45.
4.
SembG. Effect of alveolar bone grafting on maxillary growth in unilateral cleft lip and palate patients. Cleft Palate J. 1988;25(3):288-295.
5.
JiaYLFuMKMaL. Long-term outcome of secondary alveolar bone grafting in patients with various types of cleft. Br J Oral and Maxillofac Surg. 2006;44(4):308-312. doi:10.1016/j.bjoms.2005.07.003
6.
Trindade-SuedamIKSilva FilhoOGCarvalhoRMFacoRASCalvoAMOzawaTOTrindade JúniorASTrindadeIE. Timing of alveolar bone grafting determines different outcomes in patients with unilateral cleft palate. J Craniofac Surg. 2012;23(5):1283-1286. doi:10.1097/SCS.0b013e3182519ab5
7.
CalvoAMTrindade-SuedamIKSilva FilhoOGCarvalhoRMFacoRASOzawaTOCintra FMRTrindade JúniorASTrindadeIEK. Increase in age is associated with worse outcomes in alveolar bone grafting in patients with bilateral complete cleft palate. J Craniofac Surg. 2014;25(2):380-382. doi:10.1097/SCS.0000000000000639
8.
LealCRde CarvalhoRMOzawaTOde AlmeidaAMda Silva DalbenGda Cunha BastosJCGaribDG. Outcomes of alveolar graft with rhbmp-2 in CLP: Influence of cleft type and width, canine eruption, and surgeon. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2019;56(3):383-389. doi:10.1177/1055665618780981
9.
BorstlapWAHeidbuchelKLWFreihoferHPMKuijpers-JagtmanAM. Early secondary bone grafting of alveolar cleft defects. A comparison between chin and rib grafts. J Cranio Max Fac Surg. 1990;18(5):201-205. doi:10.1016/S1010-5182(05)80411-1
10.
AlonsoNTanikawaDYFreitasRDCananLOzawaTORochaDL. Evaluation of maxillary alveolar reconstruction using a resorbable collagen sponge with recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 in cleft lip and palate patients. Tissue Eng Part C Methods. 2010;16(5):1183-1189. doi:10.1089/ten.tec.2009.0824
11.
LuMRabieABM. Quantitative assessment of early healing of intramembranous and endochondral autogenous bone grafts using micro-computed tomography and Q-win image analyzer. Int J Oral Max Fac Surg. 2004;33(4):369-376. doi:10.1016/j.ijom.2003.09.009
12.
BorbaAMBorgesAHSilvaCSVBrozoskiMANaclério-HomemMGMiloroM. Predictors of complication for alveolar cleft bone graft. Br J Oral and Maxillofac Surg. 2014;52(2):174-178. doi:10.1016/j.bjoms.2013.11.001
13.
ParkYWKimSGOhJSYouJS. Use of mandibular chin bone for alveolar bone grafting in cleft patients. Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;38(1):47. doi:10.1186/s40902-016-0095-7
14.
StrujakGRieckeBPoeschlPLeiggenerCLuebbersHT. Radiographic assessment of bone graft consolidation after alveolar cleft repair from different donor sites. Clin Oral Investig. 2023;27(5):2425-2434. doi:10.1007/s00784-022-04782-y
15.
RawashdehMATelfahH. Secondary alveolar bone grafting: The dilemma of donor site selection and morbidity. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008;46(8):665-670. doi:10.1016/j.bjoms.2008.07.184
16.
YavuzMSBuyukkurtMCTozoğluSDagsuyuIMKantarciM. Evaluation of volumetry and density of mandibular symphysis bone grafts by three-dimensional computed tomography. Dent Traumatol.2009;25(5):475-479. doi:10.1111/j.1600-9657.2009.00824.x
17.
SafiYAmidRKadkhodazadehMMortazaviHSharifiMPGandomiS. Bone quality and quantity of the mandibular symphyseal region in autogenous bone grafting using cone-beam computed tomography: A cross-sectional study. Head Face Med. 2021;17(1):26. doi: 10.1186/s13005-021-00282-2
18.
KooleRBoskerHvan Der DussenFN. Late secondary autogenous bone grafting in cleft patients comparing mandibular (ectomesenchymal) and iliac crest (mesenchymal) grafts. J Cranio Max Fac Surg. 1989;17(Suppl 1):28-30. doi:10.1016/S1010-5182(89)80036-8
19.
FreihoferHPMBorstlapWAKuijpers-JagtmanAMVoorsmitRACAvan DammePAHeidbüchelKLWMBorstlap-EngelsVMF. Timing and transplant materials for closure of alveolar clefts: A clinical comparison of 296 cases. J Cranio Max Fac Surg. 1993;21(4):143-148. doi:10.1016/S1010-5182(05)80102-7
20.
WongRWKRabieABM. A quantitative assessment of the healing of intramembranous and endochondral autogenous bone grafts. Euro J Orthod. 1999;21(2):119-126. doi:10.1093/ejo/21.2.119
21.
TrindadeIKMazzottiniRSilva FilhoOGTrindadeIEKDeboniMCZ. Long-term radiographic assessment of secondary alveolar bone grafting outcomes in patients with alveolar cleft. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2005;100(3):271-277. doi:10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.03.012
22.
BerglandOSembGAbyholmFE. Elimination of the residual alveolar cleft by secondary bone grafting and subsequent orthodontic treatment. Cleft Palate J. 1986;23(3):175-205.
23.
WilliamsASembGBearnDShawWSandyJ. Prediction of outcomes of secondary alveolar bone grafting in children born with unilateral cleft lip and palate. Eur J Orthod.2003;25(2):205-211. doi:10.1093/ejo/25.2.205
24.
LandisJRKochGG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33(1):159-174. doi:10.2307/2529310
25.
CarvalhoRM. Reparo do defeito alveolar com proteína morfogenética óssea (rhBMP-2) em pacientes com fissura labiopalatina. Bauru, Brasil: Hospital de Reabilitação de Anomalias Craniofaciais, Universidade de São Paulo; 2011, Dissertation.
26.
ChoiHSChoiHGKimSHParkHJShinDHJoDIUhmKI. Influence of the alveolar cleft type on preoperative estimation using 3 CT assessment for alveolar cleft. Arch Plast Surg. 2012;39(5):477-482. doi:10.5999/aps.2012.39.5.477
27.
RychlikDWojcickiP. Bone graft healing in alveolar osteoplasty in patients with unilateral lip, alveolar process, and palate clefts. J Craniofac Surg. 2012;23(1):118-123. doi:10.1097/SCS.0b013e318240faa0
