Reversal of Osseointegration as a Novel Perspective for the Removal of Failed Dental Implants: A Review of Five Patented Methods

Osseointegration is the basis of successful dental implantology and the foundation of cementless arthroplasty and the osseointegrated percutaneous prosthetic system. Osseointegration has been considered irreversible thus far. However, controlled heating or cooling of dental implants could selectively damage the bone at the bone–implant interface, causing the reversal of osseointegration or “osseodisintegration”. This review compares five methods for implant removal, published as patent documents between 2010 and 2018, which have not yet been discussed in the scientific literature. We describe these methods and evaluate their potential for reversing osseointegration. The five methods have several technical and methodological similarities: all methods include a handpiece, a connecting device for coronal access, and a controlling device, as well as the application of mechanical and/or thermal energy. The proposed method of quantifying the temperature with a sensor as the sole means for regulating the process seems inadequate. A database used in one of the methods, however, allows a more precise correlation between a selected implant and the energy needed for its removal, thus avoiding unnecessary trauma to the patient. A flapless, microinvasive, and bone-conserving approach for removing failed dental implants, facilitating successful reimplantation, would benefit dental implantology. These methods could be adapted to cementless medical implants and osseointegrated percutaneous prosthetics. However, for some of the methods discussed herein, further research may be necessary.

Emergency Procedure Applied to Tackle the Lack of Sphericity after Cutting the Bone Bed for Cementless Hip Arthroplasty - The Acetabular Screw-Cup System Developed by Aesculap

BACKGROUND The study aimed to analyze the complications following cementless arthroplasty surgery where original sphericity was not obtained and screw-cap system was required. METHOD The study inclusion criteria were met by 39 patients aged 47 - 90 and the mean follow-up period was 54 months. Patients were operated in a lateral position, through the posterolateral or minimal posterior approach.To assess postoperative functionality, Harris Hip Score and Hoos questionnaire were applied. RESULTS According to the Harris Hip Score, 64.3% of the scores were very good and good and the mean score was 96 according to the Hoos questionnaire. The incision type, BMI and the type of cutaneous suture had no impact on the functional outcome, incidence of complications and a pain rate in the groin. Scar esthetics received highest scores from the patients operated through the minimal posterior approach and treated with a running intra-cutaneous suture. Yet a lateral position during the surgery made any intraoperative assessment of the limb length considerably more difficult. Consequently, 30% of the operated patients reported different limb lengths, which significantly (p = 0.036) lowered a functional outcome measured according to the HOOS and Harris Hip Score. The functional outcomes demonstrate a considerably negative correlation with age but not with gender although men are more vulnerable to the postoperative complications (p = 0.18). CONCLUSION Despite a relatively large number of complications following the surgery using a screw-cap system, 75% of the patients declared they would not mind another surgery using such system.