|
| ||
|
|
||
Bone Support (bone + support)
Selected AbstractsManagement of inter-dental/inter-implant papillaJOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY, Issue 7 2005Laura Zetu Abstract Objectives: The aims of this paper are to review and compare existing techniques for creation of interdental/interimplant papillae, to address factors that may influence its appearance and to present an approach that authors developed that could help clinicians to manage and recreate the interproximal papillae. Methods: Papers related to interdental and interimplant papillae published over the last 30 years were selected and analyzed. Results: Thorough treatment planning is essential for maintenance of the height of the interproximal papillae following tooth removal. The key for achieving an esthetically pleasing outcome is the clinicians' ability of properly managing/creating interdental/interimplant papillae. Bone support is the foundation for any soft tissue existence, techniques such as socket augmentation, orthodontic extrusion, guided bone regeneration, onlay graft and distraction osteogenesis are often used for this purpose. Soft tissue grafts as well as esthetic mimic restorations can also be used to enhance the esthetic outcomes. Conclusions: An esthetic triangle is developed to address the foundations that are essential for maintaining/creating papilla. These include adequate bone volume, proper soft tissue thickness as well as esthetic appearing restorations. [source] Implant-Supported Obturator Overdenture for Extensive Maxillary Resection Patient: A Clinical ReportJOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS, Issue 3 2010Cláudio Rodrigues Leles DDS Abstract This clinical report presents an implant-retained obturator overdenture solution for a Prosthodontic Diagnostic Index Class IV maxillectomy patient with a large oronasal communication and severe facial asymmetry, loss of upper lip and midfacial support, severe impairment of mastication, deglutition, phonetics, and speech intelligibility. Due to insufficient bone support to provide satisfactory zygomaticus implant anchorage, conventional implants were placed in the body of the left zygomatic arch and in the right maxillary tuberosity. Using a modified impression technique, a cobalt-chromium alloy framework with three overdenture attachments was constructed to retain a complete maxillary obturator. Patient-reported functional and quality of life measure outcomes were dramatically improved after treatment and at the two-year follow-up. [source] Marginal Bone Loss at Implants: A Retrospective, Long-Term Follow-Up of Turned Brånemark System® ImplantsCLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, Issue 1 2009Odont Lic, Solweig Sundén Pikner DDS ABSTRACT Background: Lately, presence of progressive bone loss around oral implants has been discussed. Purpose: The aim of this study was to report in a large patient group with different prosthetic restorations marginal bone level and its change as measured in radiographs obtained from prosthesis insertion up to a maximum 20 years in service. Further, it also aimed to study the impact of gender, age, jaw, prosthetic restoration, and calendar year of surgery. Materials and Methods: Out of 1,716 patients recorded for clinical examination during 1999, 1,346 patients (78.4%) could be identified. A total of 640 patients (3,462 originally installed Brånemark System® implants, Nobel Biocare, Göteborg, Sweden) with a follow-up of ,5 years were included in the study, while patients with continuous overdentures and augmentation procedures were not. Distance between the fixture/abutment junction (FAJ) and the marginal bone level was recorded. Results: The number of implants with a mean bone level of ,3 mm below FAJ increased from 2.8% at prosthesis insertion to 5.6% at year 1, and 10.8% after 5 years. Corresponding values after 10, 15, and 20 years were 15.2, 17.2, and 23.5%, respectively. Implant-based bone loss was as a mean 0.8 mm (SD 0.8) after 5 years, followed by only minor average changes. Mean bone loss on patient level followed a similar pattern. Disregarding follow-up time, altogether 183 implants (107 patients) showed a bone loss ,3 mm from prosthesis insertion to last examination. Significantly larger bone loss was found the older the patient was at surgery and for lower jaw implants. Conclusions: Marginal bone support at Brånemark implants was with few exceptions stable over years. [source] Early Functional Loading of Brånemark Dental Implants: 5-Year Clinical Follow-up StudyCLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, Issue 2 2000Ingvar Ericsson DDS ABSTRACT Background: Short-term clinical studies have indicated the possibility of one-stage surgery and early loading of machined titanium implants. However, long-term data comparing the outcome to the conventional two-stage technique are missing. Purpose: A clinical and radiographic study was performed to compare the outcome of oral rehabilitation of the endentulous mandible by fixed suprastructures connected to implants installed according to either (1) a one-stage surgical procedure and early loading (experimental group - EG) or (2) the original two-stage concept (reference group - RG). The EG and RG comprised 16 and 11 subjects, respectively. Materials and Methods: The following specific inclusion criterion were adopted: (1) all patients had to consider themselves to be in good general health, (2) the amount of bone had to enable the installation of five to six, at least 10-mm long fixtures (Mk II fixtures; Nobel Biocare AB, Göteborg, Sweden) between the mental foramina, and (3) the patients had to be available for the follow-up and maintenance program. A total of 88 implants were placed in the EG compared to 30 in the RG. In the EG, fixed appliances were connected to the implants within 20 days following implant installation while the fixed appliances in the RG were connected about 4 months following fixture installation. At delivery of the suprastructures, all patients were radiographically examined, an examination that was repeated at the 18- and 60-month follow-ups. Results: The analysis of the radiographs from the EG disclosed that during the observation period, between 18 and 60 months, the mean loss of bone support amounted to 0.2 mm (SD = 0.4). The corresponding value observed in the RG was 0.0 mm (SD = 0.5). During the 60-month observation period, no fixture was lost in any of the two groups examined. The implants under study as well as those in the reference material were at all observation intervals found to be clinically stable. Conclusions: This clinical study demonstrated that it is, at least based on a 5-year observation period, possible to successfully load via a permanent fixed rigid cross-arch suprastructure titanium dental implants soon after installation. However, such a treatment approach has to be strictly limited to the interforamina area of the endentulous mandible. Furthermore, the bone resorption was found to be within the same range around such implants as around implants installed and loaded according to the original two-stage protocal. [source] | ||||||||||