SOFIA TILAVERIDOU

SOFIA TILAVERIDOU

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

5Years (2022-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
29 September 2022 in Dentistry Journal
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ITIoannis Tilaveridis
Ioannis Tilaveridis
TKTHEODORA KATOPODI
THEODORA KATOPODI
PKPanagiotis Karakostas
Panagiotis Karakostas
GVGregory Venetis
Gregory Venetis
IDIoannis Dimitrakopoulos
Ioannis Dimitrakopoulos
KZKATERINA ZARAMPOUKA
KATERINA ZARAMPOUKA
The purpose of this article is to present four new cases of peripheral osteoma of the mandibular condyle and the literature review. A retrospective study of files from our Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery over the last 6 years revealed four cases of peripheral osteomas located in the area of the mandibular condyle. Diagnostic procedure included clinical, radiographic, and histologic criteria. Gardner’s syndrome was excluded from patient history and clinical evaluation. One patient had only an aesthetic disturbance, with facial swelling, and the other three patients presented disturbances of the mandibular function, including deviation during mouth opening along with malocclusion. Three of the patients were male and one was female; all were of middle age (45–65 years old). The proposed surgical treatment was accepted by half of the patients, while the remaining half declined the operation after a confirmation of the diagnosis. Peripheral osteomas of the maxillofacial region are uncommon, and some cases with multiple osteomas are related to Gardner’s syndrome. An osteoma of the mandibular condyle is very rare and surgical treatment is challenging for the surgeon with regards to the approach selection and the related complications. In the two cases that accepted the proposed surgical treatment, no recurrence and no complication was observed.

30 April 2025 in Surgeries
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ALAlexandros Louizakis
Alexandros Louizakis
Dimitris TatsisDimitris Tatsis
Dimitris Tatsis
TGTheodoros Grivas
Theodoros Grivas
STSOFIA TILAVERIDOU
SOFIA TILAVERIDOU
ITIoannis Tilaveridis
Ioannis Tilaveridis
AKATHANASSIOS KYRGIDIS
ATHANASSIOS KYRGIDIS
Background: Third molar (M3) removal is considered one of the most frequent oral surgical procedures worldwide. Indications for extraction include both prophylactic and therapeutic reasons. However, this does not come without complications, and despite the widespread practice, there is no consensus on whether prophylactic M3 extraction is more beneficial than conservative management. Aims: The aim of this systematic review is to highlight and compare the main differences and outcomes between prophylactic and therapeutic removal of third molars with conservative treatment and observation. Several factors have been considered such as post-surgical infection risks and complications, hospitalization indications, economic factors and periodontal health of adjacent teeth. Methods: A literature review and meta-analysis were conducted, which comprises studies describing the incidence of postoperative complications, the periodontal status of the second molar (M2), the prevalence of caries, and the economic aspects of the M3 removal. Periodontal parameters of the adjacent teeth such as periodontal pocket depth (PPD) and clinical attachment level (CAL), as well as inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) damage and post-operative inflammatory complications such as bacteremia, were considered. Finally, hospitalization and the economic burden of this procedure were also stated. Results: Third molar retention is associated with increased periodontal disease such as PPD and accumulation of plaque to the adjacent teeth, as well as risk of caries. Contrarily, prophylactic M3 extraction is often linked to unnecessary morbidity and costs, such as risk of bacteremia, trismus, postoperative pain, IAN damage, and sometimes the need for hospitalization. From an economic aspect, this frequent procedure is mostly associated with higher direct and indirect costs, which can exceed the amount of EUR 1000 per patient without hospitalization. Conclusions: This review tried to determine whether the M3 observation and retention can be more beneficial than M3 extraction, after examining certain parameters. Findings indicate that unnecessary morbidity and costs can be attributed to third molar extraction, with postoperative complications such as pain and trismus and sometimes the need for hospitalization. Transient bacteremia also accompanies third molar removal.

1 April 2022 in Hellenic Archives of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
Dimitris TatsisDimitris Tatsis
Dimitris Tatsis
SPSolon Politis
Solon Politis
GPGlykeria Pantazi
Glykeria Pantazi
CEChristos Evangelopoulos
Christos Evangelopoulos
STSOFIA TILAVERIDOU
SOFIA TILAVERIDOU
ITIoannis Tilaveridis
Ioannis Tilaveridis
Dimitris Tatsis, Solon Politis, Glykeria Pantazi, Christos Evangelopoulos, Sofia Tilaveridou, Athanassios Kyrgidis, Ioannis Tilaveridis Affiliation Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery,...

1 April 2022 in Hellenic Archives of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
SPSolon Politis
Solon Politis
Theodoros GrivasTheodoros Grivas
Theodoros Grivas
ASAnatoli Stefanidou
Anatoli Stefanidou
VTVasilis Tilaveridis
Vasilis Tilaveridis
STSOFIA TILAVERIDOU
SOFIA TILAVERIDOU
ITIoannis Tilaveridis
Ioannis Tilaveridis
Rare presence of foreign bodies in maxillary sinuses due to dental procedures; A retrospective case series analysis of treatment. Solon Politis , Theodoros Grivas, Anatoli Stefanidou, Vasilis...