Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Type:||Artigo de periódico|
|Title:||Evaluation of different treatments for oroantral/oronasal communications: experience of 112 cases|
de Moraes, M
|Abstract:||This retrospective study analyzed the etiologic factors, location and treatments for patients with oroantral or oronasal communications (OAC or ONC). Data analysis extended to gender, age, etiology, location, type of treatment and short-term complications from January 1988 to May 2004. A total of 112 patients with 101 (90%) OAC and 11 (10%) ONC were included. The main etiology for OAC was tooth extraction (95%) with similar prevalence between right (49%) and left (51%) side. For ONC, pathological conditions (27%) and exodontia (27%) were the most prevalent. For the treatment of OAC, suture was the technique most frequently used (60%), followed by buccal fat pad (28%), buccal flap (9%), palatal flap (2%) and one dental transplant (1%). For ONC, the following treatments were used: suture (46%), buccal flap (36%) and palatal flap (18%). Failure to eliminate the communication occurred in six (6%) patients of the OAC group and three (27%) of the ONC group. The results confirm that tooth extraction was the most common etiologic factor for ONC and OAC. Suture, when the communication was small (3-5 mm), and the use of a buccal fat pad (100% successful), when a larger communication existed (> 5 mm), seemed to be the two best choices for treatment.|
|Citation:||International Journal Of Oral And Maxillofacial Surgery. Churchill Livingstone, v. 35, n. 2, n. 155, n. 158, 2006.|
|Appears in Collections:||Unicamp - Artigos e Outros Documentos|
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.