Immediate Dental Implant Placement in Calvarial Bone Grafts to Rehabilitate the Severely Resorbed Edentulous Maxilla

2019 ◽  
Vol 77 (9) ◽  
pp. e23-e24
Author(s):  
A. Yousif ◽  
J. Tiddens ◽  
T. Putters ◽  
G. Raghoebar ◽  
J. Schortinghuis
Keyword(s):  
Dental Implant ◽  
Bone Grafts ◽  
Calvarial Bone ◽  
Implant Placement

Immediate dental implant placement in calvarial bone grafts to rehabilitate the severely resorbed edentulous maxilla: A prospective pilot study

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas F. Putters ◽  
Gerry M. Raghoebar ◽  
Jenneke Klein-Nulend ◽  
Arjan Vissink ◽  
Jurjen Schortinghuis
Keyword(s):  
Pilot Study ◽  
Dental Implant ◽  
Bone Grafts ◽  
Calvarial Bone ◽  
Prospective Pilot Study ◽  
Implant Placement

Is perioperative antibiotic necessary in straightforward implant placement procedures?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elçin Bedeloğlu ◽  
Mustafa Yalçın ◽  
Cenker Zeki Koyuncuoğlu
Keyword(s):  
Clavulanic Acid ◽  
Dental Implant ◽  
Prophylactic Antibiotic ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Implant Failure ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Amoxicillin Clavulanic Acid ◽  
Experimental Group

The purpose of this non-random retrospective cohort study was to evaluate the impact of prophylactic antibiotic on early outcomes including postoperative pain, swelling, bleeding and cyanosis in patients undergoing dental implant placement before prosthetic loading. Seventy-five patients (45 males, 30 females) whose dental implant placement were completed, included to the study. Patients used prophylactic antibiotics were defined as the experimental group and those who did not, were defined as the control group. The experimental group received 2 g amoxicillin + clavulanic acid 1 h preoperatively and 1 g amoxicillin + clavulanic acid twice a day for 5 days postoperatively while the control group had received no prophylactic antibiotic therapy perioperatively. Data on pain, swelling, bleeding, cyanosis, flap dehiscence, suppuration and implant failure were analyzed on postoperative days 2, 7, and 14 and week 12. No statistically significant difference was detected between the two groups with regard to pain and swelling on postoperative days 2, 7, and 14 and week 12 ( p >0.05), while the severity of pain and swelling were greater on day 2 compared to day 7 and 14 and week 12 in both groups ( p =0.001 and p <0.05, respectively). Similarly, no significant difference was found between the two groups with regard to postoperative bleeding and cyanosis. Although flap dehiscence was more severe on day 7 in the experimental group, no significant difference was found between the two groups with regard to the percentage of flap dehiscence assessed at other time points. Within limitations of the study, it has been demonstrated that antibiotic use has no effect on implant failure rates in dental implant surgery with a limited number of implants. We conclude that perioperative antibiotic use may not be required in straightforward implant placement procedures. Further randomized control clinical studies with higher numbers of patients and implants are needed to substantiate our findings.

Dental Implant Placement in Patients with a History of Medications Related to Osteonecrosis of the Jaws: A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judd Sher ◽  
Kate Kirkham-Ali ◽  
Denny Luo ◽  
Catherine Miller ◽  
Dileep Sharma
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
At Risk ◽  
Drug Therapy ◽  
Dental Implant ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Bisphosphonate Treatment ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
History Of

The present systematic review evaluates the safety of placing dental implants in patients with a history of antiresorptive or antiangiogenic drug therapy. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, Web of Science, and OpenGrey databases were used to search for clinical studies (English only) to July 16, 2019. Study quality was assessed regarding randomization, allocation sequence concealment, blinding, incomplete outcome data, selective outcome reporting, and other biases using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale and the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist for case series. A broad search strategy resulted in the identification of 7542 studies. There were 28 studies reporting on bisphosphonates (5 cohort, 6 case control, and 17 case series) and one study reporting on denosumab (case series) that met the inclusion criteria and were included in the qualitative synthesis. The quality assessment revealed an overall moderate quality of evidence among the studies. Results demonstrated that patients with a history of bisphosphonate treatment for osteoporosis are not at increased risk of implant failure in terms of osseointegration. However, all patients with a history of bisphosphonate treatment, whether taken orally for osteoporosis or intravenously for malignancy, appear to be at risk of ‘implant surgery-triggered’ MRONJ. In contrast, the risk of MRONJ in patients treated with denosumab for osteoporosis was found to be negligible. In conclusion, general and specialist dentists should exercise caution when planning dental implant therapy in patients with a history of bisphosphonate and denosumab drug therapy. Importantly, all patients with a history of bisphosphonates are at risk of MRONJ, necessitating this to be included in the informed consent obtained prior to implant placement. The James Cook University College of Medicine and Dentistry Honours program and the Australian Dental Research Foundation Colin Cormie Grant were the primary sources of funding for this systematic review.

scholarly journals Simultaneous implant placement with autogenous onlay bone grafts: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Guoqiang Ma ◽  
Chaoan Wu ◽  
Miaoting Shao
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Bone Grafts ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Analysis Model ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Delayed Implant Placement ◽  
Onlay Grafts

AbstractSeveral authors have suggested that implants can be placed simultaneously with onlay bone grafts without affecting outcomes. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to answer the following clinical questions: (1) What are the outcomes of implants placed simultaneously with autogenous onlay bone grafts? And (2) is there a difference in outcomes between simultaneous vs delayed placement of implants with autogenous onlay bone grafts? Databases of PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched up to 15 November 2020. Data on implant survival was extracted from all the included studies (single arm and comparative) to calculate point estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and pooled using the DerSimonian–Laird meta-analysis model. We also compared implant survival rates between the simultaneous and delayed placement of implants with data from comparative studies. Nineteen studies were included. Five of them compared simultaneous and delayed placement of implants. Dividing the studies based on follow-up duration, the pooled survival of implant placed simultaneously with onlay grafts after <2.5 years of follow-up was 93.1% (95% CI 82.6 to 97.4%) and after 2.5–5 years was 86% (95% CI 78.6 to 91.1%). Implant survival was found to be 85.8% (95% CI 79.6 to 90.3%) with iliac crest grafts and 95.7% (95% CI 83.9 to 93.0%) with intra-oral grafts. Our results indicated no statistically significant difference in implant survival between simultaneous and delayed placement (OR 0.43, 95% 0.07, 2.49, I2=59.04%). Data on implant success and bone loss were limited. Data indicates that implants placed simultaneously with autogenous onlay grafts have a survival rate of 93.1% and 86% after a follow-up of <2.5 years and 2.5–5years respectively. A limited number of studies indicate no significant difference in implant survival between the simultaneous and delayed placement of implants with onlay bone grafts. There is a need for randomized controlled trials comparing simultaneous and delayed implant placement to provide robust evidence.

scholarly journals Comparative radiographic and resonance frequency analyses of the peri-implant tissue after dental implants placement using flap and flapless techniques: An experimental study on domestic pigs

2013 ◽  
Vol 70 (6) ◽  
pp. 586-594 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zoran Vlahovic ◽  
Branko Mihailovic ◽  
Zoran Lazic ◽  
Mileta Golubovic
Keyword(s):  
Bone Resorption ◽  
Resonance Frequency ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Dental Implant ◽  
Surgical Techniques ◽  
Primary Stability ◽  
Implant Stability ◽  
Domestic Pigs ◽  
Flap Technique ◽  
Implant Placement

Background/Aim. Flapless implant surgery has become very important issue during recent years, mostly thanks to computerization of dentistry and software planning of dental implants placements. The aim of this study was to compare flap and flapless surgical techniques for implant placement through radiographic and radiofrequency analyses. Methods. The experiment was made in five domestic pigs. Nine weeks following domestic pigs teeth extraction, implants were placed, on the right side using surgical technique flap, and flapless on the left side. Digital dental Xrays were applied to determine primary dental implant stability quality (ISQ). At certain intervals, not later than three months, the experimental animals were sacrificed, and just before it, control X-rays were applied to measure dental implants stability. Results. Radiographic analysis showed that peri-implant bone resorption in the first 4 weeks following placement implants with flap and flapless surgical techniques was negligible. After the 3 months, mean value of peri-implant bone resorption of the implants placed using flap technique was 1.86 mm, and of those placed using flapless technique was 1.13 mm. In relation to the primary dental implant stability in the first and second week there was an expected decrease in ISQ values, but it was less expressed in the dental implants placed using the flapless technique. In the third week the ISQ values were increased in the dental implants placed by using both techniques, but the increase in flapless implant placement was higher (7.4 ISQ) than in flap implant placement (1.5 ISQ). The upward trend continued in a 4- week period, and after 3 months the dental implant stability values in the implants placed using flap technique were higher than the primary stability for 7.1 ISQ, and in the implants placed using flapless technique were higher comparing to the primary stability for 10.1 ISQ units. Conclusion. Based on the results of radiographic and resonance frequency analyses it can be concluded that the flapless technique in surgical implants placemat, leads to better results.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document