scholarly journals Effect of Ridge Splitting Simultaneous With Implant Placement for Treatment of Narrow Ridge

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 285-290
Keyword(s):  
Implant Placement ◽  
Narrow Ridge

scholarly journals Effect of Ridge Splitting Simultaneous with Implant Placement for Treatment of Narrow Ridge

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 285-290
Author(s):  
Ahmed Abdulhalim ◽  
Bahaa Eldin Tawfik ◽  
ahmed hosni
Keyword(s):  
Implant Placement ◽  
Narrow Ridge

scholarly journals Narrow Ridge Management with Ridge Splitting with Piezotome for Implant Placement: Report of 2 Cases

2012 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 305-309 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deepak Agrawal ◽  
Alka Sanjay Gupta ◽  
Vilas Newaskar ◽  
Amit Gupta ◽  
Subhash Garg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Implant Placement ◽  
Narrow Ridge

Ridge Expansion and Immediate Placement With Piezosurgery and Screw Expanders in Atrophic Maxillary Sites: Two Case Reports

2013 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Kelly ◽  
Dennis Flanagan
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Time ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Donor Site ◽  
Donor Site Morbidity ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Immediate Placement ◽  
Narrow Ridge ◽  
Immediate Implant ◽  
Ridge Width ◽  
Cone Beam Computerized Tomography

Endosseous dental implants may require bone augmentation before implant placement. Herein is described an approach to edentulous ridge expansion with the use of piezosurgery and immediate placement of implants. This may allow for a shortened treatment time and the elimination of donor-site morbidity. Two cases are reported. This technique uses a piezoelectric device to cut the crestal and proximal facial cortices. Space is then created with motorized osteotomes to widen the split ridge. This technique allows for expansion of narrow, anatomically limiting, atrophic ridges, creating space for immediate implant placement. The facial and lingual cortices provide support with vital osteocytes for osteogenesis. The 2 patients presented had adequate bone height for implant placement but narrow edentulous ridges. In patient 1 at site #11, the ridge crest was 3.12 mm thick and was expanded to accept a 4.3 mm × 13 mm implant. The resulting ridge width was 8.88 mm, which was verified using cone beam computerized tomography (CBCT). In patient 2 at site #8 and site #9, the narrow ridge was expanded using the same technique to accept 2 adjacent 3.5 mm × 14 mm implants. The implants were restored to a functional and esthetic outcome.

scholarly journals Implant placement with guided bone regeneration in esthetic zone- A case report

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-66
Author(s):  
A Maharjan ◽  
S Joshi ◽  
A Verma ◽  
RS Gorkhali
Keyword(s):  
Case Report ◽  
Bone Regeneration ◽  
Soft Tissues ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Guided Bone Regeneration ◽  
Surgical Approaches ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Narrow Ridge ◽  
Common Technique

Alveolar ridge deficiency is considered a major limitation for successful implant placement, as well as for the long-term success rate, especially in the anterior maxillary region. Implants placed without regard for prosthetic position often results in dental restorations that are functionally and esthetically compromised. Adequate peri-implant bone support is essential for immediate and long-term implant stability, as well as for future esthetic outcome. To achieve this goal, augmentation of lost bone is often necessary. A variety of surgical approaches have been proposed to enhance the alveolar bone volume. Guided bone regeneration (GBR) is the most common technique for localized bone augmentation. GBR, by application of cell occlusive membranes that mechanically exclude non-osteogenic cell populations from the surrounding soft tissues, has become a well-documented and highly successful procedure for localized augmentation of the atrophic jaw before or simultaneously with implant placement. This case report presents simultaneous approach of guided bone regeneration and implant placement in the maxillary anterior region with narrow ridge defect.

scholarly journals Full Mouth Rehabilitation Using Alveolar Ridge Splitting Technique with Immediate Implant Placement in the Maxilla and Delayed Implant Placement in the Mandible: A Case Report with 4 Years Follow-Up

2021 ◽  
pp. 81-89
Author(s):  
Houssam Abou Hamdan ◽  
Talal H. Salame ◽  
Georges Aoun
Keyword(s):  
Success Rates ◽  
Splitting Technique ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Immediate Placement ◽  
Healing Phase ◽  
Full Mouth Rehabilitation ◽  
Narrow Ridge ◽  
Immediate Implant ◽  
Delayed Implant Placement

The bone split technique is used to increase the width of a narrow ridge for implant placement with high success rates. This technique was performed on a 53-year-old patient with bilateral mandibular posterior edentulous and fully edentulous maxilla. Implants placement was performed afterward with two-step modus operandi on the mandible and immediate placement on maxilla. A successful prosthetic rehabilitation was done following the healing phase. This approach led to full restoration of function and esthetic with a predictable outcome.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document