Influence of Microgap Location and Configuration on Radiographic Bone Loss Around Submerged Implants: An Experimental Study in Dogs

Purpose: The vertical location of the implant-abutment connection influences the subsequent reaction of the peri-implant bone. It is not known, however, whether any additional influence is exerted by different microgap configurations. Therefore, the radiographic bone reactions of two different implant systems were monitored for 6 months. Materials and Methods: In eight mongrel dogs, two implants with an internal Morse-taper connection (INT group) were placed on one side of the mandible; the contralateral side received two implants with an external-hex connection (EXT group). on each side, one implant was aligned at the bone level (equicrestal) and the second implant was placed 1.5 mm subcrestal. Healing abutments were placed 3 months after submerged healing, and the implants were maintained for another 3 months without prosthetic loading. At implant placement and after 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 months, standardized radiographs were obtained, and peri-implant bone levels were measured with regard to microgap location and evaluated statistically. Results: All implants osseointegrated clinically and radiographically. The overall mean bone loss was 0.68 +/- 0.59 mm in the equicrestal INT group, 1.32 +/- 0.49 mm in the equicrestal EXT group, 0.76 +/- 0.49 mm in the subcrestal INT group, and 1.88 +/- 0.81 mm in the subcrestal EXT group. The differences between the INT and EXT groups were statistically significant (paired t tests). The first significant differences between the internal and external groups were seen at month 1 in the subcrestal groups and at 3 months in the equicrestal groups. Bone loss was most pronounced in the subcrestal EXT group. Conclusions: Within the limits of this study, different microgap configurations can cause different amounts of bone loss, even before prosthetic loading. Subcrestal placement of a butt-joint microgap design may lead to more pronounced radiographic bone loss. INT J ORAL MAXILLOFAC IMPLANTS 2011;26:941-946

Digital Radiographic Evaluation of the Level of Alveolar Bone Crest in External Hexagon Implants Submitted to 2 Types of Implant Abutments Under Immediate Loading

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate by means of digital radiography the behavior of the alveolar bone crest in external hexagon implants following the use of 2 different types of abutments, one for conventional cemented prosthesis and one for modified cemented prosthesis.Methods: Ten external hexagon implants (platform 4.1) were placed in 5 patients. Initial instrumentation was carried out to obtain primary stability of the temporary prostheses under immediate loading. Each patient received both abutments for conventional and modified cemented prosthesis. Standardized digital periapical radiographies were performed at times T0 (immediately after implant placement) and T1 (4 months after implant placement). A straight line was initially established from the implant platform to the distal and mesial periimplantar marginal bone tissue (immediately in contact with the implant) and measured by digital radiography, using Sidexis version 2.3 (Sirona Dental Systems GmbH, Bensheim, Germany) software. The data were submitted to paired-samples t-test analysis.Results: There was no significant difference between the conventional and modified cemented prosthesis. In both cases, t-test results were within the null hypothesis level.Conclusion: The abutment for the modified cemented prosthesis resulted in no significant radiographic difference of alveolar bone crest height, when compared with the conventional cemented prostheses.

Influence of Microgap Location and Configuration on Radiographic Bone Loss in Nonsubmerged Implants: An Experimental Study in Dogs

Purpose: The implant-abutment connection (microgap) influences the pen-implant bone morphology. However, it is unclear if different microgap configurations additionally modify bone reactions. This preliminary study aimed to radiographically monitor pen-implant bone levels in two different microgap configurations during 3 months of nonsubmerged healing. Materials and Methods: Six dogs received two implants with internal Morse taper connection (INT group) on one side of the mandible and two implants with external-hex connection (EXT group) on the other side. One implant on each side was positioned at bone level (equicrestal); the second implant was inserted 1.5 mm below the bone crest (subcrestal). Healing abutments were attached directly after implant insertion, and the implants were maintained for 3 months without prosthetic loading. At implant placement and 1, 2, and 3 months, standardized radiographs were taken to monitor pen-implant bone levels. Results: All implants osseointegrated. A total bone loss of 0.48 +/- 0.66 mm was measured in the equicrestal INT group, 0.69 +/- 0.43 mm in the equicrestal EXT group, 0.79 +/- 0.93 mm in the subcrestal INT group, and 1.56 +/- 0.53 mm in the subcrestal EXT group (P>.05, paired t tests). Within the four groups, bone loss over time became significantly greater in the EXT groups than in the INT groups. The greatest bone loss was noted in the subcrestal EXT group. Conclusion: Within the limits of this animal study, it seems that even without prosthetic loading, different microgap configurations exhibit different patterns of bone loss during nonsubmerged healing. Subcrestal positioning of an external butt joint microgap may lead to faster radiographic bone loss. Int J Prosthodont 2011;24:445-452.

Influence of Microgap Location and Configuration on Peri-implant Bone Morphology in Nonsubmerged Implants: An Experimental Study in Dogs

Purpose: It is unknown whether different micro gap configurations can cause different pen-implant bone reactions. Therefore, this study sought to compare the peri-implant bone morphologies of two implant systems with different implant-abutment connections. Materials and Methods: Three months after mandibular tooth extractions in six mongrel dogs, two oxidized screw implants with an external-hex connection were inserted (hexed group) on one side, whereas on the contralateral side two grit-blasted screw implants with an internal Morse-taper connection (Morse group) were placed. on each side, one implant was inserted level with the bone (equicrestal) and the second implant was inserted 1.5 mm below the bony crest (subcrestal). Healing abutments were inserted immediately after implant placement. Three months later, the peri-implant bone levels, the first bone-to-implant contact points, and the width and steepness of the peri-implant bone defects were evaluated histometrically. Results: All 24 implants osseointegrated clinically and histologically. No statistically significant differences between the hexed group and Morse group were detected for either the vertical position for peri-implant bone levels (Morse equicrestal -0.16 mm, hexed equicrestal -0.22 mm, Morse subcrestal 1.50 mm, hexed subcrestal 0.94 mm) or for the first bone-to-implant contact points (Morse equicrestal -2.08 mm, hexed equicrestal -0.98 mm, Morse subcrestal -1.26 mm, hexed subcrestal -0.76 mm). For the parameters width (Morse equicrestal -0.15 mm, hexed equicrestal -0.59 mm, Morse subcrestal 0.28 mm, hexed subcrestal -0.70 mm) and steepness (Morse equicrestal 25.27 degree, hexed equicrestal 57.21 degree, Morse subcrestal 15.35 degree, hexed subcrestal 37.97 degree) of the pen-implant defect, highly significant differences were noted between the Morse group and the hexed group. Conclusion: Within the limits of this experiment, it can be concluded that different microgap configurations influence the size and shape of the peri-implant bone defect in nonsubmerged implants placed both at the crest and subcrestally. INT J ORAL MAXILLOFAC IMPLANTS 2010;25:540-547

Photoelastic Analysis of Cemented or Screwed Implant-Supported Prostheses With Different Prostheses Connections

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

A comparison of profilometer and AutoCAD software techniques in evaluation of implant angulation in vitro

Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare 2 different methods of assessment of implants at different inclinations (90 degrees and 65 degrees)-with a profilometer and AutoCAD software. Materials and Methods: Impressions (n = 5) of a metal matrix containing 2 implants, 1 at 90 degrees to the surface and 1 at 65 degrees to the surface, were obtained with square impression copings joined together with dental floss splinting covered with autopolymerizing acrylic resin, an open custom tray, and vinyl polysiloxane impression material. Measurement of the angles (in degrees) of the implant analogs were assessed by the same blinded operator with a profilometer and through analysis of digitized images by AutoCAD software. For each implant analog, 3 readings were performed with each method. The results were subjected to a nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test, with P <= .05 considered significant. Results: For implants perpendicular to the horizontal surface of the specimen (90 degrees), there were no significant differences between the mean measurements obtained with the profilometer (90.04 degrees) and AutoCAD (89.95 degrees; P=.9142). In the analyses of the angled implants at 65 degrees in relation to the horizontal surface of the specimen, significant differences were observed (P=.0472) between the mean readings with the profilometer (65.73 degrees) and AutoCAD (66.25 degrees). Conclusions: The degrees of accuracy of implant angulation recording vary among the techniques available and may vary depending on the angle of the implant. Further investigation is needed to determine the best test conditions and the best measuring technique for determination of the angle of the implant in vitro.

Rehabilitation with ear prosthesis linked to osseointegrated implants

Background: The absence of an ear, which can be the result of a congenital malformation, surgical tumour resection or traumatic injury, is a significant aesthetic problem. Attachment of ear prostheses with adhesives can cause local irritation for the wearer and affect the colour of the prostheses. Use of implants in craniofacial reconstruction can improve the retention and stability of prostheses giving to patient greater comfort and security relative to adhesive attachment.Objective: The aim of this report was to present a clinical case of a mutilated patient who was rehabilitated by means of installing an ear prosthesis fixed through osseointegrated implants.Materials and methods: The patient had two implants installed in the mastoid region that were linked by a bar, and a clip-type system was used. The ear prosthesis was constructed from medical-use silicone, pigmented to match the patient's skin colour and linked to the retention system.Conclusion: The patient's rehabilitation was satisfactory from both a functional and an aesthetic point of view, making it possible for the patient to return to a normal social life and regain lost self-esteem.

Retention Systems to Implant-Supported Craniofacial Prostheses

Osseointegrated implants in craniofacial reconstructions improve prostheses retention and stability and comfort and safety for a patient. According to biomechanical principles, the treatment success regarding osseointegration maintenance depends on an adequate surgical technique associated to a retention system that provides favorable tension distribution to implants. Furthermore, patient expectation, esthetics, function, and anatomic limitations must be evaluated during treatment planning. Therefore, the aims of this study were to present available retention systems to implant-supported craniofacial prosthesis and to highlight the advantages, indications, and limitations. A literature review was conducted through a MEDLINE search. Sixteen articles and 2 textbooks met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. It was concluded that the success of craniofacial rehabilitation with implants depends on an adequate surgical technique and an adequate selection of a retention system.

Most Frequent Tumors in Maxillofacial Area Rehabilitated Through Surgical Reconstruction and Prostheses

Cancer is regarded as the abnormal cellular multiplication; it is not controlled by the organism; and its cells present a differentiated DNA. Initially, the disease does not show clinical signs, but it can be diagnosed by laboratorial examinations. When tumors are present in the maxillofacial area, they can entail the loss of these area organs, which become responsible for the carrier's social environment exclusion. This paper aimed at showing, through a literature review, the cancers that more commonly happen in the face and the possibilities of regenerating in the patient mutilated through surgical reconstruction and prostheses.

Stability of cp-Ti and Ti-6Al-4V alloy for dental implants as a function of saliva pH - an electrochemical study

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)

Effect of implant connection and restoration design (screwed vs. cemented) in reliability and failure modes of anterior crowns

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)

Care and Cleaning of Maxillofacial Prostheses

Both the cleaning and care of the prosthesis are fundamental for maintaining its quality. Therefore, the aim of this study was to show the methods of cleaning and care the patient needs to take as regards the prosthesis and adjacent tissue, starting with correct instruction and training by the professional. It has been verified that among the materials for fabricating maxillofacial prostheses, silicone was considered the major retainer of microorganisms on its surface. Therefore, for cleaning prostheses, the use of water and neutral soap, as well as chlorhexidine, is recommended. As regards care of the adjacent tissues, it is recommended to remove the prosthesis before going to sleep, in addition to washing the prosthesis receptor tissues with water and neutral soap or with a mixture of hydrogen peroxide and water. Whereas for the mucosal surfaces of the ophthalmic cavity, cleaning with filtered and boiled water or physiological solution at least 3 times a day is recommended.

Postsurgical Care for Rehabilitation With Implant-Retained Extraoral Prostheses

The health of a peri-implant tissue is a critical factor for the long-term success of treatment with extraoral implants. However, infection and inflammation may occur and lead to implant loss and prostheses failure. Therefore, some postsurgical care as hygiene with soap and water, soft toothbrush, and Superfloss type dental floss and medication with anti-inflammatory and antibiotic are suggested to avoid complications. In addition, a thin and smooth layer of subcutaneous tissue in the peri-implant area should be preserved during implant insertion to favor the assistance recommended in this phase.

Effect of Superstructure Materials and Misfit on Stress Distribution in a Single Implant-Supported Prosthesis: A Finite Element Analysis

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

Effect of Misfit on Preload Maintenance of Retention Screws of Implant-Supported Prostheses

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of unilateral misfit at different levels on a crown-implant-retention screw system of implant-supported crowns. Hexagon castable UCLA abutments were cast in Co-Cr alloy to fabricate 48 metallic crowns divided into four groups (n = 12). Group A: crowns did not present misfit; Groups B, C and D: crowns were fabricated with unilateral misfit of 50, 100, and 200 mu m, respectively. The crowns were attached by titanium retention screw with 30 N/cm to external hexagonal osseointegrated implants embedded in acrylic resin. After 2 min, the retention screw of each replica was submitted to detorque evaluation by an analogic torque gauge. Three retention screws were used to perform detorque evaluation at each replica and the procedure was repeated twice with each screw. Each group was submitted to 72 detorque measurements. Data were evaluated by ANOVA and Tukey test (P < 0.05). All groups exhibited significant decrease (P < 0.05) in preload and the lowest decrease occurred in Group A. Groups B, C, and D were statistically significant different from Group A (P < 0.05), but there was no statistically significant difference between Groups B and D (P > 0.05). Crowns with unilateral misfit presented higher preload decrease than crowns completely fitted to osseointegrated implants.