Reconstruction of the severely atrophic mandible using calvarial split bone grafts for implant-supported oral rehabilitation

OBJECTIVES: This article describes reconstruction of the severely atrophic mandible using calvarial bone grafts for implant-supported prosthetic oral rehabilitation. The study aim was to evaluate the efficacy of the treatment by determining implant survival and complication rates, and the extent of the postoperative graft resorption. STUDY DESIGN: Ten patients who underwent the treatment were followed clinically and radiologically using panoramic radiographs and CT scans during a mean postoperative period of 30 months. RESULTS: Good bone healing was observable 6 months postoperatively. The height reduction measured on panoramic radiographs was insignificant (mean 0.68 mm). Only minor complications occurred. Implant survival was 95%. Prosthodontic treatment was successfully performed in all cases, resulting in an improvement of oral function. Histological analysis of 1 bone biopsy showed minimal resorptive changes in otherwise very dense bone. CONCLUSION: Augmentation using calvarial grafts is a promising treatment alternative for the severely atrophic mandible.

[Implant-supported bridges in the edentulous jaw. Clinical aspects of a simple treatment concept]

Clinical aspects of a simple treatment concept with fixed prostheses in the edentulous jaw are described. Fixed implant-supported reconstructions in the edentulous jaw require multiple implants, are technically complex, aesthetically demanding and metal-ceramic solutions are expensive. Specific surgical techniques to enhance the hard and soft tissue conditions become often necessary. Thus the bar-supported overdenture may be preferred, because problems with aesthetics and alveolar ridge deficiencies can be solved more easily and the number of implants is reduced. Both, the "All-on-Four" technique and the "Procera implant bridge" are simple type of fixed prostheses, comparable to overdentures or complete dentures with regard to design and technology. They present a cost-effective alternative, with predictable aesthetics and optimum passive fit.

A systematic review of the 5-year survival and complication rates of implant-supported single crowns

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this systematic review was to assess the 5-year survival of implant-supported single crowns (SCs) and to describe the incidence of biological and technical complications. METHODS: An electronic MEDLINE search complemented by manual searching was conducted to identify prospective and retrospective cohort studies on SCs with a mean follow-up time of at least 5 years. Failure and complication rates were analyzed using random-effects Poisson's regression models to obtain summary estimates of 5-year proportions. RESULTS: Twenty-six studies from an initial yield of 3601 titles were finally selected and data were extracted. In a meta-analysis of these studies, survival of implants supporting SCs was 96.8% [95% confidence interval (CI): 95.9-97.6%] after 5 years. The survival rate of SCs supported by implants was 94.5% (95% CI: 92.5-95.9%) after 5 years of function. The survival rate of metal-ceramic crowns, 95.4% (95% CI: 93.6-96.7%), was significantly (P=0.005) higher than the survival rate, 91.2% (95% CI: 86.8-94.2%), of all-ceramic crowns. Peri-implantitis and soft tissue complications occurred adjacent to 9.7% of the SCs and 6.3% of the implants had bone loss exceeding 2 mm over the 5-year observation period. The cumulative incidence of implant fractures after 5 years was 0.14%. After 5 years, the cumulative incidence of screw or abutment loosening was 12.7% and 0.35% for screw or abutment fracture. For supra-structure-related complications, the cumulative incidence of ceramic or veneer fractures was 4.5%. CONCLUSION: It can be concluded that after an observation period of 5 years, high survival rates for implants and implant-supported SCs can be expected. However, biological and particularly technical complications are frequent.

Implant-supported distal extensions in severely resorbed posterior alveolar ridges

The application of implant-borne rehabilitations in residual alveolar ridges may be restricted by various anatomic conditions, as available bone height and characteristics. Here we report the clinical outcome of implants placed in severely resorbed posterior ridges, in addition to various implant-supported treatment modalities. Extra Oral implants (Straumann, Basel, Switzerland) with the intraosseous length of 2.5–5mm were installed in the posterior alveolar ridges. Following the healing period of 4–6 months, implants were exposed and included in the distal extensions of fixed and removable prosthesis. At recall appointments were collected surgical, clinical and radiological variables, including the evidence of adverse effects. An 8-years life table analysis was calculated. The treatment protocol was applied in thirty-five patients, presenting 31 removable and 4 fixed complete implant-supported dentures. A total of 61 Extra Oral implants were placed posterior to the distal implants, at the mean distance of 29.8mm (range 15.6–62.7mm). Three implants failed during the osteointegration phase, yielding an 8-year cumulative success rate of 92.24%. Following the osteointegration period, no major bone loss or other adverse events were found. The clinical results indicated that the Extra Oral implants may be successfully used in addition to the other, longer implants. Thus, a relatively long extension in the posterior region may be employed. With careful preoperative planning, this technique offers a simple and beneficial complementary treatment option for removable and fixed complete dentures.

A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of implant supported fixed dental prostheses with cantilever extensions after an observation period of at least 5 years

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to assess the survival rates of short-span implant-supported cantilever fixed dental prostheses (ICFDPs) and the incidence of technical and biological complications after an observation period of at least 5 years. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An electronic MEDLINE search supplemented by manual searching was conducted to identify prospective or retrospective cohort studies reporting data of at least 5 years on ICFDPs. Five- and 10-year estimates for failure and complication rates were calculated using standard or random-effect Poisson regression analysis. RESULTS: The five studies eligible for the meta-analysis yielded an estimated 5- and 10-year ICFDP cumulative survival rate of 94.3% [95 percent confidence interval (95% CI): 84.1-98%] and 88.9% (95% CI: 70.8-96.1%), respectively. Five-year estimates for peri-implantitis were 5.4% (95% CI: 2-14.2%) and 9.4% (95% CI: 3.3-25.4%) at implant and prosthesis levels, respectively. Veneer fracture (5-year estimate: 10.3%; 95% CI: 3.9-26.6%) and screw loosening (5-year estimate: 8.2%; 95% CI: 3.9-17%) represented the most common complications, followed by loss of retention (5-year estimate: 5.7%; 95% CI: 1.9-16.5%) and abutment/screw fracture (5-year estimate: 2.1%; 95% CI: 0.9-5.1%). Implant fracture was rare (5-year estimate: 1.3%; 95% CI: 0.2-8.3%); no framework fracture was reported. Radiographic bone level changes did not yield statistically significant differences either at the prosthesis or at the implant levels when comparing ICFDPs with short-span implant-supported end-abutment fixed dental prostheses. CONCLUSIONS: ICFDPs represent a valid treatment modality; no detrimental effects can be expected on bone levels due to the presence of a cantilever extension per se.

Comparative study of four retentive anchor systems for implant supported overdentures--retention force changes

OBJECTIVES: Wear of attachments leads to a loss of retention and potentially reduces the function of complete dentures. This study evaluated the retention force changes of different prefabricated attachment systems for implant-supported overdentures to estimate the wear constancy and applicability in clinical practice. METHODS: Four prefabricated attachment systems were tested [Group SG: retentive ball attachment (Straumann, Switzerland) with gold matrix, Group ST: retentive ball attachment (Straumann, Switzerland) with titanium spring matrix, Group IB: UNOR i-Ball with Ecco matrix (UNOR, Switzerland) and Group IMZ: IMZ-TwinPlus ball attachment with gold matrix (DENTSPLY Friadent, Germany)]. Ten samples of each system were subjected to 10,000 insertion-separation cycles. RESULTS: Results showed that all types of attachments showed wear, which led to a loss of retention force after an initial increase at the beginning of the wear simulation. Attachments with a plastic retention insert or gold matrices underwent the smallest changes in retention force. The titanium spring system showed the largest changes in retention force and a greater variation between the different cycles and specimen. This behaviour is probably caused by a large fitting tolerance of the titanium spring. CONCLUSIONS: Attachment systems which possess a male and female component of different material composition are preferable. They show smaller changes in the retention force. For retention force increase and wear compensation, an attachment system should be adjustable.