scholarly journals Titanium Wear of Dental Implants from Placement, under Loading and Maintenance Protocols

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 1067
Author(s):  
Georgios Romanos ◽  
Gerard Fischer ◽  
Rafael Delgado-Ruiz
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Inflammatory Response ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Soft Tissues ◽  
Loading Conditions ◽  
Material Change ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Implant Abutment ◽  
Hard Tissues ◽  
Titanium Nanoparticles

The objective of this review was to analyze the process of wear of implants leading to the shedding of titanium particles into the peri-implant hard and soft tissues. Titanium is considered highly biocompatible with low corrosion and toxicity, but recent studies indicate that this understanding may be misleading as the properties of the material change drastically when titanium nanoparticles (NPs) are shed from implant surfaces. These NPs are immunogenic and are associated with a macrophage-mediated inflammatory response by the host. The literature discussed in this review indicates that titanium NPs may be shed from implant surfaces at the time of implant placement, under loading conditions, and during implant maintenance procedures. We also discuss the significance of the micro-gap at the implant-abutment interface and the effect of size of the titanium particles on their toxicology. These findings are significant as the titanium particles can have adverse effects on local soft and hard tissues surrounding implants, implant health and prognosis, and even the health of systemic tissues and organs.

Biomechanical comparison of implantation approaches for the treatment of mandibular total edentulism

2020 ◽  
Vol 234 (10) ◽  
pp. 1139-1150
Author(s):  
Yunus Ziya Arslan ◽  
Derya Karabulut ◽  
Songul Kahya ◽  
Erol Cansiz
Keyword(s):  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Loading Conditions ◽  
Stress Concentrations ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Impact Forces ◽  
Alternative Approach ◽  
Implant Abutment ◽  
Biomechanical Responses ◽  
Three Dimensional Models ◽  
Biomechanical Comparison

Applying four anterior implants placed vertically or tilted in the mandible is considered to provide clinically reasonable results in the treatment of mandibular posterior edentulism. It is also reported that a combination of four anterior and two short posterior implants can be an alternative approach for the rehabilitation of severe atrophy cases. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the biomechanical responses of three different implant placement configurations, which represent the clinical options for the treatment of mandibular edentulism. Three-dimensional models of the mandible, prosthetic bar, dental implant, abutment, and screw were created. Finite element models of the three implant configurations (Protocol 1: Four anterior implants, Protocol 2: Four anterior and two short posterior implants, Protocol 3: Two anterior and two tilted posterior implants: All-on-4™ concept) were generated for 10 patients and analyzed under different loading conditions including chewing, biting, and impact forces. Protocol 2 led to the lowest stress concentrations over the mandible among the three protocols ( p < 0.016). Protocol 2 resulted in significantly lower stresses than Protocol 3 and Protocol 1 over prosthetic bars under chewing forces ( p < 0.016). None of the implant placement protocols consistently exhibited the lowest stress distribution over abutments. The lowest stresses over dental implants under the chewing, biting, and impact forces were obtained in Protocol 1, Protocol 2, and Protocol 3, respectively ( p < 0.016). Protocol 3 was the best option to obtain the lowest stress values over the screws under all types of loading conditions ( p < 0.016). In conclusion, Protocol 2 was biomechanically more ideal than Protocol 1 and Protocol 3 to manage the posterior edentulism.

scholarly journals Dental Implant Abutments and Their Selection - A Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (35) ◽  
pp. 3053-3059
Author(s):  
Veena Benakatti ◽  
Jayashree Arun Sajjanar ◽  
Aditya Ramnarayan Acharya
Keyword(s):  
Dental Implants ◽  
Complete Information ◽  
Individual Case ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Prosthesis Retention ◽  
Soft Tissue Profile ◽  
Implant Abutments ◽  
Implant Abutment ◽  
Implant Dentistry ◽  
Selection Of

Dental implants have become the most promising and accepted prosthetic alternative to missing teeth. Innovative and technological advances in implant dentistry have improved the performance and long term prognosis of dental implants. The growing demand for dental implants has led many manufacturers to enter the industry. With this growth in implant dentistry various implant brands and their components are made available in the markets that vary in terms of design and other features. Success of implant restorations is related to various components involved with the prosthesis. Implant abutment is the link between implant and restoration; right selection of this abutment is vital for the success of implant prosthesis. There are varieties of implant abutments available in the market. Clinician should have adequate knowledge about these abutments and various factors that affect abutment selection, to choose the right one. Each implant case is different and clinician should be able to identify requirements of every individual case and choose the best suitable abutment available in the market. These abutments vary in implant abutment connection, material, type of retention, and fabrication methods. Though the ideal concept is prosthetically driven implant placement, many times anatomical features, esthetic requirements, soft tissue profile, axial load distribution, malpositioned implants, and many other patient factors do not allow ideal implant placement. Such cases can be managed by careful selection of abutments by assessing the clinical requirements, thus offering better treatment outcome. This paper is an attempt to contemplate various factors affecting abutment selection, and throw light on various implant abutments available in the market, thus guiding the clinician in abutment selection. Hence this article summarizes complete information about the implant abutments, including introduction, types, selection, and different abutments available in market. KEY WORDS Abutment Material, Implant Abutments, Implant Abutment Connection, Prosthesis Retention

scholarly journals A Narrative Review of the Histological and Histomorphometrical Evaluation of the Peri-Implant Bone in Loaded and Unloaded Dental Implants. A 30-Year Experience (1988–2018)

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 2088 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margherita Tumedei ◽  
Adriano Piattelli ◽  
Marco Degidi ◽  
Carlo Mangano ◽  
Giovanna Iezzi
Keyword(s):  
Dental Implants ◽  
Narrative Review ◽  
Loading Conditions ◽  
Bone Implant ◽  
Bone Implant Contact ◽  
Hard Tissues ◽  
Implant Loading ◽  
The University ◽  
System Selection

Background: The aim of the present review was to assess the histological and histomorphometrical data from the paper published by our Laboratory on peri-implant bone in dental implants in different loading conditions. Methods: The papers published in different implant loading conditions, in dental implants retrieved from humans, and in the Hard Tissues Research Center of the University of Chieti-Pescara, Italy, were screened on MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and other electronic databases until 31 December 2018. Only articles that reported the histological and histomorphometrical values of the Bone-Implant Contact (BIC) were selected. Results: The system selection provided a total of 155 papers. The manuscripts included for the narrative review were 57. These papers provided histological and histomorphometrical data. Conclusions: The bone remodeling around dental implants was found to be a dynamic process; loading changed the microstructure of the peri-implant bone; and implants were found to provide a successful function, over several decades, with different range of degrees of BIC in vivo (varying from a little more than 30% to a little more than 90%). Loaded implants presented a 10%–12% higher BIC values when compared to submerged, unloaded implants, and rougher surfaces had, on average, about a 10% higher BIC than machined surfaces.

Adverse Effects of Implants in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review

2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 69-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rekhalakshmi Kamatham ◽  
Priyanka Avisa ◽  
Dileep Nag Vinnakota ◽  
Sivakumar Nuvvula
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Mini Implants ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Probing Depth ◽  
Crestal Bone Loss ◽  
Ebsco Host

Objective: To determine the evidence on the adverse effects of placing dental implants in healthy growing children. Study design: A systematic search was conducted in five electronic databases: PubMed, Ovid, Cochrane, EBSCO host, ProQuest. Studies on implants placed in children below the age of 19 years, with loss of tooth either due to trauma or caries were included, whereas, studies on mini implants and implants placed due to congenital absence of teeth were excluded. The articles that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were analyzed based on the predetermined criteria of success. Results: A total of 8 publications fulfilled the inclusion criteria. All the included articles were case reports/series, involving a total of 16 implants (15 maxillary, one mandibular) in 11 adolescents (7 boys and 4 girls). The age of implant placement ranged between ten to 17 years with a mean age of 13.4 years and the follow up period, 4.5 months to 13 years. Pain, paresthesia, mobility or peri-implant radiolucency was not reported in any case report, indicating good integration. Radiographic crestal bone loss, probing depth and implant esthetics were not mentioned. The infraocclusion was not reported in 5 cases (age: 11–17 years, follow up: 4.5 months-two years), however, it was an adverse effect in 6 cases (age: ten-17 years, follow up: three-13 years). Conclusion: There is insufficient evidence to contradict the placement of dental implants in healthy growing children; the only reported adverse event is infraocclusion, the management of which too is discussed. However, as all the data is from case reports, the result should be interpreted with caution. Therefore, well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to address this gap in the literature.

Effects of a New Implant Abutment Design on Peri-Implant Soft Tissues

2014 ◽  
Vol 40 (5) ◽  
pp. 581-588 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hua-Hong Chien ◽  
Robert L. Schroering ◽  
Hari S. Prasad ◽  
Dimitris N. Tatakis
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissues ◽  
Contralateral Side ◽  
Junctional Epithelium ◽  
Hard Tissue ◽  
Apical Position ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Linear Distance ◽  
Crestal Bone Loss ◽  
Implant Abutment ◽  
Bone To Implant Contact

The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of a modified implant abutment design on peri-implant soft and hard tissues in dogs. Three months after extraction of mandibular premolar teeth, 3 dental implants were placed in each side of the jaw using a 1-stage approach. Implants on one side of the mandible received standard abutments (control), and implants on the contralateral side received modified, patented, grooved abutments (test). Two months after implant placement, animals were euthanized and specimens were prepared for histologic and histomorphometric assessment. The linear distance (in micrometers) was measured from the implant shoulder (IS) to the following landmarks: gingival margin (GM; distance IS-GM), most apical position of the junctional epithelium (JE; distance IS-JE), and bone crest (BC; distance IS-BC). Percent of bone-to-implant contact was also measured. Histologic assessment revealed that all implants were osseointegrated and that interimplant gingival fibers between test abutments appeared to be more numerous and organized than control abutments. The IS-GM and IS-JE distances in test implants were greater than the corresponding distances in control implants (P = .024 and P = .015, respectively), whereas crestal bone loss (IS-BC) was greater for control implants than test implants (P = .037). There were no differences between control and test implants in bone-to-implant contact (P = .69), which averaged close to 50%. These results suggest that the modified groove design incorporated in standard abutments confers both soft and hard tissue benefits.

Prosthetically Driven Computer-Guided One-Piece Zirconia Implant Placement and Restoration Replacing Missing Central Incisor: A Case Report

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shatha Alshali ◽  
Rayan Asali ◽  
Ammar Almarghlani
Keyword(s):  
Case Report ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Soft Tissues ◽  
Pure Titanium ◽  
Commercially Pure Titanium ◽  
Central Incisor ◽  
Post Surgery ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Provisional Restoration ◽  
Zirconia Implant

Currently, the gold standard materials of choice for dental implants are the commercially pure titanium. However, these materials may have suboptimal anterior esthetic outcome due to the dark grayish burnout. To enhance the esthetic outcomes, zirconium dioxide materials, with reported long-term success in medical uses and with its tooth-like color, was introduced as a dental implants material. This case report describes the fully guided planning and placement of one-piece zirconia implant replacing missing central incisor. A 21-years-old male patient, non-smoker in excellent general health, presented with a missing tooth #21. Straumann PURE® (4.1x10 mm) Ceramic implant was placed. Three months post-surgery, the soft tissues architecture has been achieved and stabilized, healing was satisfactory around the zirconia implant and provisional restoration. The final layered zirconia crown was fabricated. Two-step cementation technique was used to minimize the excess cement during final delivery of the crown. After delivery of the final restoration, the patient was followed up after 1, 3, 6, and 12 months.

scholarly journals The Symmetric 3D Organization of Connective Tissue around Implant Abutment: A Key-Issue to Prevent Bone Resorption

Symmetry ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (7) ◽  
pp. 1126
Author(s):  
Giovanna Iezzi ◽  
Francesca Di Lillo ◽  
Michele Furlani ◽  
Marco Degidi ◽  
Adriano Piattelli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Resorption ◽  
Connective Tissue ◽  
Inflammatory Cell ◽  
Soft Tissues ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Collagen Fibers ◽  
Inflammatory Cell Infiltration ◽  
Cell Infiltration ◽  
Oral Epithelium ◽  
Implant Abutment

Symmetric and well-organized connective tissues around the longitudinal implant axis were hypothesized to decrease early bone resorption by reducing inflammatory cell infiltration. Previous studies that referred to the connective tissue around implant and abutments were based on two-dimensional investigations; however, only advanced three-dimensional characterizations could evidence the organization of connective tissue microarchitecture in the attempt of finding new strategies to reduce inflammatory cell infiltration. We retrieved three implants with a cone morse implant–abutment connection from patients; they were investigated by high-resolution X-ray phase-contrast microtomography, cross-linking the obtained information with histologic results. We observed transverse and longitudinal orientated collagen bundles intertwining with each other. In the longitudinal planes, it was observed that the closer the fiber bundles were to the implant, the more symmetric and regular their course was. The transverse bundles of collagen fibers were observed as semicircular, intersecting in the lamina propria of the mucosa and ending in the oral epithelium. No collagen fibers were found radial to the implant surface. This intertwining three-dimensional pattern seems to favor the stabilization of the soft tissues around the implants, preventing inflammatory cell apical migration and, consequently, preventing bone resorption and implant failure. This fact, according to the authors’ best knowledge, has never been reported in the literature and might be due to the physical forces acting on fibroblasts and on the collagen produced by the fibroblasts themselves, in areas close to the implant and to the symmetric geometry of the implant itself.

scholarly journals Macrophagic Inflammatory Response Next to Dental Implants with Different Macro- and Micro-Structure: An In Vitro Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. 5324
Author(s):  
Maria Menini ◽  
Francesca Delucchi ◽  
Domenico Baldi ◽  
Francesco Pera ◽  
Francesco Bagnasco ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Inflammatory Response ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Titanium Implants ◽  
Implant Surface ◽  
Bone Implant ◽  
Optimal Outcomes ◽  
Negative Controls ◽  
Inflammatory Effect

(1) Background: Intrinsic characteristics of the implant surface and the possible presence of endotoxins may affect the bone–implant interface and cause an inflammatory response. This study aims to evaluate the possible inflammatory response induced in vitro in macrophages in contact with five different commercially available dental implants. (2) Methods: one zirconia implant NobelPearl® (Nobel Biocare) and four titanium implants, Syra® (Sweden & Martina), Prama® (Sweden & Martina), 3iT3® (Biomet 3i) and Shard® (Mech & Human), were evaluated. After 4 h of contact of murine macrophage cells J774a.1 with the implants, the total RNA was extracted, transcribed to cDNA and the gene expression of the macrophages was evaluated by quantitative PCR (qPCR) in relation to the following genes: GAPDH, YWHAZ, IL1β, IL6, TNFα, NOS2, MMP-9, MMP-8 and TIMP3. The results were statistically analyzed and compared with negative controls. (3) Results: No implant triggered a significant inflammatory response in macrophages, although 3iT3 exhibited a slight pro-inflammatory effect compared to other samples. (4) Conclusions: All the samples showed optimal outcomes without any inflammatory stimulus on the examined macrophagic cells.

scholarly journals Clinical long-term and patient-reported outcomes of dental implants in oral cancer patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eik Schiegnitz ◽  
Lena Katharina Müller ◽  
Keyvan Sagheb ◽  
Lisa Theis ◽  
Vahide Cagiran ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Oral Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Oral Cancer Patients

Abstract Background and purpose The aim of this clinical study was to investigate the clinical long-term and patient-reported outcome of dental implants in patients with oral cancer. In addition, analysis of the influence of radiation therapy, timing of implant insertion, and augmentation procedures on implant survival was performed. Material and methods This retrospective study investigated the clinical outcome of 711 dental implants in 164 oral cancer patients, inserted by experienced surgeons of the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Medical Center Mainz, Germany. Oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) was evaluated. Results Cumulative 5-year and 10-year implant survival rates for all included implants were 87.3% and 80.0%. Implants placed straight after ablative surgery (primary implant placement) and implants placed after completing the oncologic treatment (secondary implant placement) showed a comparable implant survival (92.5% vs. 89.5%; p = 0.635). Irradiation therapy had no significant influence on implant survival of secondary placed implants (p = 0.929). However, regarding implant site (native bone vs. augmented bone) and radiation therapy (non-irradiated bone vs. irradiated bone), implants inserted in irradiated bone that received augmentation procedures showed a statistically significant lower implant survival (p < 0.001). Patients reported a distinct improvement in OHRQoL. Conclusions Promising long-term survival rates of dental implants in patients after treatment of oral cancer were seen. In addition, patients benefit in form of an improved OHRQoL. However, bone augmentation procedures in irradiated bone may result in an impaired implants’ prognosis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document