Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Implant Integration (implant + integration)
Selected AbstractsParameters for Successful Implant Integration Revisited Part I: Immediate Loading Considered in Light of the Original Prerequisites for OsseointegrationCLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, Issue 2010FACD, Oded Bahat BDS ABSTRACT Purpose: With the increasing popularity and publication of loading implants at the time of placement, including at time of dental extraction and simultaneous with reconstructive procedures, the objective was to evaluate known variables identified for a traditional unloaded healing period and determine the applicability of these variables to immediate loading. Materials: A total of 124 published reports available as of January 2008 that contained information about loading from the time of surgery up to 3 months postsurgically were examined in light of published variables affecting osseointegration based on a 2 stage surgical approach. Methods: The articles were examined to differentiate between immediate loading (within the initial 48 hours) and early/delayed loading of implants. Success or survival criteria were noted, and where reasons for failure were available, categorized according to six variables considered as determinants for maintaining a long-term bone-to-implant contact. Results: Approximately 60 of the 124 reports described immediately loading implants within 48 with single-tooth, partial, and full-arch restorations, as well as implant overdentures. The implant success or survival rates ranged from 70.8% to 100%. Most studies considered implant survival to be the only criterion for success. Conclusions: Of six parameters identified in 1981 as influencing osseointegration, two parameters (the status of the bone/implant site and implant loading conditions) appear to have diagnostic implications, whereas three (implant design, surgical technique, and implant finish) may affect immediate loading positively or adversely. [source] Parameters for Successful Implant Integration Revisited Part II: Algorithm for Immediate Loading Diagnostic FactorsCLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, Issue 2010FACD, Oded Bahat BDS ABSTRACT Immediate loading of dental implants has become a widely reported practice with success rates ranging from 70.8% to 100%. Although most studies have considered implant survival to be the only measure of success, a better definition includes the long-term stability of the hard and soft tissues around the implant(s) and other adjacent structures, as well as the long-term stability of all the restorative components. The parameters identified in 1981 by Albrektsson and colleagues as influencing the establishment and maintenance of osseointegration have been reconsidered in relation to immediate loading to improve the chances of achieving such success. Two of the six parameters (status of the bone/implant site and implant loading conditions) have preoperative diagnostic implications, whereas three (implant design, surgical technique, and implant finish) may compensate for less-than-ideal site and loading conditions. Factors affecting the outcome of immediate loading are reviewed to assist clinicians attempting to assess its risks and benefits. [source] Bone Reformation and Implant Integration following Maxillary Sinus Membrane Elevation: An Experimental Study in PrimatesCLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, Issue 1 2006Vinicius C Palma DDS ABSTRACT Background:, Recent clinical studies have described maxillary sinus floor augmentation by simply elevating the maxillary sinus membrane without the use of adjunctive grafting materials. Purpose:, This experimental study aimed at comparing the histologic outcomes of sinus membrane elevation and simultaneous placement of implants with and without adjunctive autogenous bone grafts. The purpose was also to investigate the role played by the implant surface in osseointegration under such circumstances. Materials and Methods:, Four tufted capuchin primates had all upper premolars and the first molar extracted bilaterally. Four months later, the animals underwent maxillary sinus membrane elevation surgery using a replaceable bone window technique. The schneiderian membrane was kept elevated by insertion of two implants (turned and oxidized, Brånemark System®, Nobel Biocare AB, Göteborg, Sweden) in both sinuses. The right sinus was left with no additional treatment, whereas the left sinus was filled with autogenous bone graft. Implant stability was assessed through resonance frequency analysis (OsstellTM, Integration Diagnostics AB, Göteborg, Sweden) at installation and at sacrifice. The pattern of bone formation in the experimental sites and related to the different implant surfaces was investigated using fluorochromes. The animals were sacrificed 6 months after the maxillary sinus floor augmentation procedure for histology and histomorphometry (bone-implant contact, bone area in threads, and bone area in rectangle). Results:, The results showed no differences between membrane-elevated and grafted sites regarding implant stability, bone-implant contacts, and bone area within and outside implant threads. The oxidized implants exhibited improved integration compared with turned ones as higher values of bone-implant contact and bone area within threads were observed. Conclusions:, The amount of augmented bone tissue in the maxillary sinus after sinus membrane elevation with or without adjunctive autogenous bone grafts does not differ after 6 months of healing. New bone is frequently deposited in contact with the schneiderian membrane in coagulum-alone sites, indicating the osteoinductive potential of the membrane. Oxidized implants show a stronger bone tissue response than turned implants in sinus floor augmentation procedures. [source] OC8 The short-term efficacy of osseointegrated implants in patients with non-malignant oral mucosal disease: a case seriesORAL DISEASES, Issue 2006TA Hodgson Purpose, The spectrum of patients who may wish or warrant osseointegrated implants is increasing, despite few reports of the impact of non-malignant oral mucosal disease upon implant placement. This report details the implant placement outcomes in three patients with pre-existing oral mucosal disease. Case reports,A: Four implants were placed in the lower anterior region of a 78-year-old female with longstanding mucous membrane pemphigoid (MMP) in 2004. The MMP had resulted in extensive cicatrisation of the upper and lower buccal and labial vestibules. One implant failed to osseointegrate, but was successfully replaced. There have been no other postplacement adverse events, despite the MMP remaining mildly active. B: A 36-years-old male with orofacial granulomatosis characterised by recurrent lip swelling and gingival enlargement, had a single implant placed in the upper canine region in 2001. Although still in situ significant peri-implant alveolar bone loss has occurred and has been stabilised by repeated debridement, local administration of topical minocycline and several courses of systemic metronidazole. C: A 53-years-old female with oral manifestations of diffuse systemic sclerosis and fibrosing alveolitis had four lower anterior mandibular implants placed in 1995 to support an 8 unit bridge. One episode of peri-implant inflammation was controlled with local debridement and topical chlorhexidine mouthrinse. The implants remain satisfactory 11 years postinsertion. Conclusion, The short-term failure of osseointegrated implant integration appears uncommon in patients with non-malignant oral mucosal disease. There remains a need to establish appropriate case selection criteria and monitor outcomes. [source] An Overview of Complete Artificial Fixed Dentition Supported by Endosseous ImplantsARTIFICIAL ORGANS, Issue 1 2005Dennis Flanagan Abstract:, The construction of a complete restoration of the dentition by the surgical placement of endosseous titanium implants that support a fixed prosthesis in each jaw is possible. The positionings of the implants and teeth in the prostheses are important factors for a successful long-term result. Distribution of the occlusal biting forces over as many implants as possible is important. Off-axial occlusal biting forces should be diverted to the anterior jaws where the forces are not as great. The posterior teeth should be designed with flat occlusal surfaces that separate during excursionary mandibular chewing movements. Medial mandibular flexure caused by the contraction of the medial pterygoid muscle can be addressed by constructing the prosthesis in segments, so as not to have a rigid entity encased in flexing bone that may induce stress in the bone, potentially leading to loss of implant integration and failure. Segmenting also ensures an appropriate fit of the prosthesis with respect to casting and porcelain firing distortion. Lip support by means of a flange in the prosthesis may be necessary when there has been a large amount of bone loss from edentulous resorption. Cleaning and routine maintenance of the prostheses every 3,6 months is essential. [source] | ||||||||||