A study of effectiveness of midazolam sedation for prevention of myocardial arrhythmias in endosseous implant placement

Purpose: The study aimed to assess electrocardiographic alterations during oral implant placement surgeries under local anesthesia (lidocaine chlorhydrate with epinephrine), using 15 mg of midazolam as an anxiolytic premedication. Material and methods: The study randomly selected 20 patients, aged 21-50 years old, requiring bilateral mandibular dental implants. Each patient was assessed using placebo on one side and midazolam on the contralateral side, with random, double-blinded distribution. The electrocardiogram recorded 12 static leads every 2 min, while D2 derivations were recorded continuously. Results: No statistically significant differences were observed between the placebo and midazolam when analyzing the morphological behavior of the electrocardiographic wave and the presence of arrhythmias during the experiment. However, under sedation, assessment of the behavior of electrocardiographic parameters during different stages of the procedure revealed statistically significant differences (P<0.05) for heart rate, P-wave amplitude and duration of the RR and QTc intervals. The arrhythmias detected were considered low risk for patients without systemic alterations and were observed in 53.3% of patients. The most frequently occurring alterations were tachycardia, bradycardia, supraventricular and ventricular extrasystoles and blocked atrial extrasystole, which were similar for both placebo and midazolam, with the greatest incidence during the initial, incision and bone drilling stages. Conclusion: The use of 15 mg of midazolam made no difference compared with the placebo. The use of 15 mg of midazolam did not show an advantage in the incidence of arrhythmias The anxiolytic premedication does not prevent myocardial arrhythmias in endosseous implant placement. The clinical significance of the arrhythmias may not represent serious risks.

Optimal sites for orthodontic mini-implant placement assessed by cone beam computed tomography

OBJECTIVES: To determine (1) the optimal sites for mini-implant placement in the maxilla and the mandible based on dimensional mapping of the interradicular spaces and cortical bone thickness and (2) The effect of age and sex on the studied anatomic measurements. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The cone beam computed tomography images of 100 patients (46 males, 54 females) divided into two age groups (13-18 years), and (19-27 years) were used. The following interradicular measurements were performed: (1) Buccolingual bone thickness; (2) Mesiodistal spaces both buccally and palatally/lingually; and (3) Buccal and palatal/lingual cortical thicknesses. RESULTS: In the maxilla, the highest buccolingual thickness existed between first and second molars; the highest mesiodistal buccal/palatal distances were between the second premolar and the first molar. The highest buccal cortical thickness was between the first and second premolars. The highest palatal cortical thickness was between central and lateral incisors. In the mandible, the highest buccolingual and buccal cortical thicknesses were between the first and second molars. The highest mesiodistal buccal distance was between the second premolar and the first molar. The highest mesiodistal lingual distance was between the first and second premolars. The highest lingual cortical thickness was between the canine and the first premolar. The males and the older age group had significantly higher buccolingual, buccal, and palatal cortical thicknesses at specific sites and levels in the maxilla and the mandible. CONCLUSIONS: A clinical guideline for optimal sites for mini-implant placement is suggested. Sex and age affected the anatomic measurements in certain areas in the maxilla and the mandible.

Stability of Contour Augmentation and Esthetic Outcomes of Implant Supported Single Crowns in the Esthetic Zone. 3-Year Results of a Prospective Study With Early Implant Placement Post Extraction

Early implant placement is one of the treatment options after tooth extraction. Implant surgery is performed after a healing period of 4 to 8 weeks and combined with a simultaneous contour augmentation using the guided bone regeneration technique to rebuild stable esthetic facial hard- and soft-tissue contours.

Early implant placement following single-tooth extraction in the esthetic zone: biologic rationale and surgical procedures

Early implant placement is one treatment option for implant therapy following single-tooth extraction in the anterior maxilla. The surgical technique presented here is characterized by tooth extraction without flap elevation, a 4- to 8-week soft tissue healing period, implant placement in a correct three-dimensional position, simultaneous contour augmentation on the facial aspect with guided bone regeneration using a bioabsorbable collagen membrane combined with autogenous bone chips and a low-substitution bone filler, and tension-free primary wound closure. The surgical step-by-step procedure is presented with a case report. In addition, the biologic rationale is discussed.

Early implant placement with simultaneous guided bone regeneration following single-tooth extraction in the esthetic zone: a cross-sectional, retrospective study in 45 subjects with a 2- to 4-year follow-up

BACKGROUND: The concept of early implant placement is a treatment option in postextraction sites of single teeth in the anterior maxilla. Implant placement is performed after a soft tissue healing period of 4 to 8 weeks. Implant placement in a correct three-dimensional position is combined with a simultaneous guided bone regeneration procedure to rebuild esthetic facial hard and soft tissue contours. METHODS: In this retrospective, cross-sectional study, 45 patients with an implant-borne single crown in function for 2 to 4 years were recalled for examination. Clinical and radiologic parameters, routinely used in implant studies, were assessed. RESULTS: All 45 implants were clinically successful according to strict success criteria. The implants demonstrated ankylotic stability without signs of a peri-implant infection. The peri-implant soft tissues were clinically healthy as indicated by low mean plaque (0.42) and sulcus bleeding index (0.51) values. None of the implants revealed a mucosal recession on the facial aspect as confirmed by a clearly submucosal position of all implant shoulders. The mean distance from the mucosal margin to the implant shoulder was -1.93 mm on the facial aspect. The periapical radiographs showed stable peri-implant bone levels, with a mean distance between the implant shoulder and the first bone-implant contact of 2.18 mm. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study demonstrated successful treatment outcomes for all 45 implants examined. The mid-term follow-up of 2 to 4 years also showed that the risk for mucosal recession was low with this treatment concept. Prospective clinical studies are required to confirm these encouraging results.

A retrospective analysis of patients referred for implant placement to a specialty clinic: indications, surgical procedures, and early failures

Purpose: This retrospective study analyzed the pool of patients referred for treatment with dental implants over a 3-year period in a referral specialty clinic. Materials and Methods: All patients receiving dental implants between 2002 and 2004 in the Department of Oral Surgery and Stomatology, University of Bern, were included in this retrospective study. Patients were analyzed according to age, gender, indications for implant therapy, location of implants, and type and length of implants placed. A cumulative logistic regression analysis was performed to identify and analyze potential risk factors for complications or failures. Results: A total of 1,206 patients received 1,817 dental implants. The group comprised 573 men and 633 women with a mean age of 55.2 years. Almost 60% of patients were age 50 or older. The most frequent indication for implant therapy was single-tooth replacement in the maxilla (522 implants or 28.7%). A total of 726 implants (40%) were inserted in the esthetically demanding region of the anterior maxilla. For 939 implants (51.7%), additional bone-augmentation procedures were required. Of these, ridge augmentation with guided bone regeneration was performed more frequently than sinus grafting. Thirteen complications leading to early failures were recorded, resulting in an early failure rate of 0.7%. The regression analysis failed to identify statistically significant failure etiologies for the variables assessed. Conclusions: From this study it can be concluded that patients referred to a specialty clinic for implant placement were more likely to be partially edentulous and over 50 years old. Single-tooth replacement was the most frequent indication (> 50%). Similarly, additional bone augmentation was indicated in more than 50% of cases. Adhering to strict patient selection criteria and a standardized surgical protocol, an early failure rate of 0.7% was experienced in this study population

Early implant placement with simultaneous guided bone regeneration following single-tooth extraction in the esthetic zone: 12-month results of a prospective study with 20 consecutive patients

BACKGROUND: Early implant placement is one of the treatment options in postextraction sites in the anterior maxilla. Implant placement is performed after a soft tissue healing period of 4 to 8 weeks. Implant placement is combined with a simultaneous guided bone regeneration (GBR) procedure to rebuild esthetic facial hard and soft tissue contours. METHODS: In this prospective case-series study, 20 consecutive patients treated with an implant-borne single crown were prospectively followed for 12 months. Clinical, radiologic, and esthetic parameters were recorded to assess treatment outcomes. RESULTS: At the 12-month examination, all 20 implants were successfully integrated, demonstrating ankylotic stability and healthy peri-implant soft tissues as documented by standard parameters. The esthetic outcomes assessed by a pink esthetic score (PES) and a white esthetic score (WES) demonstrated pleasing results overall. The WES values were slightly superior to the PES values. The periapical radiographs showed minimal crestal bone loss around the used bone level implants, with mean bone loss of 0.18 mm at 12 months. Only one implant showed >0.5 mm bone loss, combined with minor mucosal recession of 0.5 to 1.0 mm. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective case series study evaluating the concept of early implant placement demonstrated successful tissue integration for all 20 implants. The short-term follow-up of 12 months revealed pleasing esthetic outcomes overall, as assessed by objective parameters. The risk for mucosal recession was low; only one patient showed minor recession of the facial mucosa. These encouraging results need to be confirmed with 3- and 5-year follow-up examinations.

Long-term stability of early implant placement with contour augmentation

In this prospective case series study, 20 patients with an implant-borne single crown following early implant placement with simultaneous contour augmentation were followed for 6 years. Clinical, radiologic, and esthetic parameters were assessed. In addition, cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) was used at 6 years to examine the facial bone wall. During the study period, all 20 implants were successfully integrated, and the clinical parameters remained stable over time. Pleasing esthetic outcomes were noted, as assessed by the pink esthetic scores. None of the implants developed mucosal recession of 1 mm or more. The periapical radiographs yielded stable peri-implant bone levels, with a mean DIB of 0.44 mm at 6 years. The CBCT scans showed that all 20 implants had a detectable facial bone wall at 6 years, with a mean thickness of around 1.9 mm. In summary, this prospective case series study demonstrated stable peri-implant hard and soft tissues for all 20 implants, and pleasing esthetic outcomes overall. The follow-up of 6 years confirmed that the risk for mucosal recession is low with early implant placement. In addition, contour augmentation with guided bone regeneration (GBR) was able to establish and maintain a facial bone wall in all 20 patients.

Long-term stability of contour augmentation with early implant placement following single tooth extraction in the esthetic zone: a prospective, cross-sectional study in 41 patients with a 5- to 9-year follow-up

BACKGROUND Early implant placement with simultaneous contour augmentation is documented with short- and medium-term studies. The long-term stability of contour augmentation is uncertain. METHODS In this prospective, cross-sectional study, 41 patients with an implant-borne single crown were examined twice, in 2006 and 2010. Clinical, radiologic, and esthetic parameters were assessed at both examinations. In addition, a cone beam computed tomographic (CBCT) image was obtained during the second examination to assess the dimensions of the facial bone wall. RESULTS All 41 implants demonstrated ankylotic stability without signs of peri-implant infection at both examinations. The clinical parameters remained stable over time. Satisfactory esthetic outcomes were noted, as assessed by the pink and white esthetic score (PES/WES) indices. Overall, the PES scores were slightly higher than the WES scores. None of the implants developed mucosal recession over time, as confirmed by values of the distance between implant shoulder and mucosal margin and cast measurements. The periapical radiographs yielded stable peri-implant bone levels, with a mean distance between implant shoulder and first visible bone-implant contact value of 2.18 mm. The CBCT analysis demonstrated a mean thickness of the facial bone wall ≈2.2 mm. In two implants (4.9%) no facial bone wall was detectable radiographically. CONCLUSIONS This prospective cross-sectional study demonstrates stable peri-implant hard and soft tissues for all 41 implants examined and satisfactory esthetic outcomes overall. The follow-up of 5 to 9 years confirmed again that the risk for mucosal recession is low with early implant placement. In addition, contour augmentation with guided bone regeneration was able to establish and maintain a facial bone wall in 95% of patients.

Piezoelectric alveolar ridge-splitting technique with simultaneous implant placement: a cohort study with 2-year radiographic results

PURPOSE Extended grafting procedures in atrophic ridges are invasive and time-consuming and increase cost and patient morbidity. Therefore, ridge-splitting techniques have been suggested to enlarge alveolar crests. The aim of this cohort study was to report techniques and radiographic outcomes of implants placed simultaneously with a piezoelectric alveolar ridge-splitting technique (RST). Peri-implant bone-level changes (ΔIBL) of implants placed with (study group, SG) or without RST (control group, CG) were compared. MATERIALS AND METHODS Two cohorts (seven patients in each) were matched regarding implant type, position, and number; superstructure type; age; and gender and received 17 implants each. Crestal implant bone level (IBL) was measured at surgery (T0), loading (T1), and 1 year (T2) and 2 years after loading (T3). For all implants, ΔIBL values were determined from radiographs. Differences in ΔIBL between SG and CG were analyzed statistically (Mann-Whitney U test). Bone width was assessed intraoperatively, and vertical bone mapping was performed at T0, T1, and T3. RESULTS After a mean observation period of 27.4 months after surgery, the implant survival rate was 100%. Mean ΔIBL was -1.68 ± 0.90 mm for SG and -1.04 ± 0.78 mm for CG (P = .022). Increased ΔIBL in SG versus CG occurred mainly until T2. Between T2 and T3, ΔIBL was limited (-0.11 ± 1.20 mm for SG and -0.05 ± 0.16 mm for CG; P = .546). Median bone width increased intraoperatively by 4.7 mm. CONCLUSIONS Within the limitations of this study, it can be suggested that RST is a well-functioning one-stage alternative to extended grafting procedures if the ridge shows adequate height. ΔIBL values indicated that implants with RST may fulfill accepted implant success criteria. However, during healing and the first year of loading, increased IBL alterations must be anticipated.

Positional guidelines for orthodontic mini-implant placement in the anterior alveolar region: a systematic review

PURPOSE To investigate the adequacy of potential sites for insertion of orthodontic mini-implants (OMIs) in the anterior alveolar region (delimited by the first premolars) through a systematic review of studies that used computed tomography (CT) or cone beam CT (CBCT) to assess anatomical hard tissue parameters, such as bone thickness, available space, and bone density. MATERIALS AND METHODS MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched to identify all relevant papers published between 1980 and September 2011. An extensive search strategy was performed that included the key words "computerized (computed) tomography" and "mini-implants." Information was extracted from the eligible articles for three anatomical areas: maxillary anterior buccal, maxillary anterior palatal, and mandibular anterior buccal. Quantitative data obtained for each anatomical variable under study were evaluated qualitatively with a scoring system. RESULTS Of the 790 articles identified by the search, 8 were eligible to be included in the study. The most favorable area for OMI insertion in the anterior maxilla (buccally and palatally) and mandible is between the canine and the first premolar. The best alternative area in the maxilla (buccally) and the mandible is between the lateral incisor and the canine, while in the maxillary palatal area it is between the central incisors or between the lateral incisor and the canine. CONCLUSIONS Although there is considerable heterogeneity among studies, there is a good level of agreement regarding the optimal site for OMI placement in the anterior region among investigations of anatomical hard tissue parameters based on CT or CBCT scans. In this context, the area between the lateral incisor and the first premolar is the most favorable. However, interroot distance seems to be a critical factor that should be evaluated carefully.

Evaluation of a new experimental model to study bone healing after ridge expansion with simultaneous implant placement--a pilot study in minipigs.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the suitability of a minipig model for the study of bone healing and osseointegration of dental implants following bone splitting and expansion of narrow ridges. MATERIAL AND METHODS In four minipigs, the mandibular premolars and first molars were extracted together with removal of the buccal bone plate. Three months later, ridge splitting and expansion was performed with simultaneous placement of three titanium implants per quadrant. On one side of the mandible, the expanded bone gap between the implants was filled with an alloplastic biphasic calcium phosphate (BCP) material, while the gap on the other side was left unfilled. A barrier membrane was placed in half of the quadrants. After a healing period of 6 weeks, the animals were sacrificed for histological evaluation. RESULTS In all groups, no bone fractures occurred, no implants were lost, all 24 implants were osseointegrated, and the gap created by bone splitting was filled with new bone, irrespective of whether BCP or a barrier membrane was used. Slight exposure of five implants was observed, but did not lead to implant loss. The level of the most coronal bone-to-implant contact varied without being dependent on the use of BCP or a barrier membrane. In all groups, the BCP particles were not present deep in the bone-filled gap. However, BCP particles were seen at the crestal bone margin, where they were partly integrated in the new bone. CONCLUSIONS This new minipig model holds great promise for studying experimental ridge splitting/expansion. However, efforts must be undertaken to reduce implant exposure and buccal bone resorption.

Horizontal ridge augmentation in conjunction with or prior to implant placement in the anterior maxilla: a systematic review.

PURPOSE To systematically review clinical studies examining the survival and success rates of implants in horizontal ridge augmentation, either prior to or in conjunction with implant placement in the anterior maxilla. MATERIALS AND METHODS A literature search was undertaken up to September 2012 including clinical studies in English with ≥ 10 consecutively treated patients and a mean follow-up of at least 12 months. Two reviewers screened the pertinent articles and extracted the data. Key words focused on the outcome parameters (implant success, implant survival, horizontal bone gain, and intra- and postoperative complications) in studies utilizing either a simultaneous approach (ridge augmentation performed at the time of implant placement) or a staged approach (ridge augmentation performed prior to implant placement) were analyzed. RESULTS A total of 13 studies met the inclusion criteria, with 2 studies in the simultaneous group and 11 studies in the staged group. In the simultaneous group, survival rates of implants were 100% in both studies, with one study also reporting a 100% implant success rate. No data on horizontal bone gain were available. In the staged group, success rates of implants placed in horizontally augmented ridges ranged from 96.8% to 100% (two studies), and survival rates ranged from 93.5% to 100% (five studies). However, follow-up periods differed widely (up to 4.1 years). Mean horizontal bone gain determined at reentry (implant placement) ranged from 3.4 to 5.0 mm with large overall variations (0 to 9.8 mm, five studies). Intraoperative complications were not reported. Postsurgical complications included mainly mucosal dehiscences (five studies), and, occasionally, complete failures of block grafts were described in one study. CONCLUSIONS Staged and simultaneous augmentation procedures in the anterior maxilla are both associated with high implant success and survival rates. The level of evidence, however, is better for the staged approach than for the simultaneous one.