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.

Maxillary sinus floor elevation using the (transalveolar) osteotome technique with or without grafting material. Part I: Implant survival and patients' perception

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the survival and success rates of implants installed utilizing the (transalveolar) osteotome technique, to compare peri-implant soft tissue parameters and marginal bone levels of osteotome-installed implants with implants placed using standard surgical procedures, and to evaluate patient-centered outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: During 2000 to 2005, 252 Straumann dental implants were inserted in 181 patients. The surgical technique was a modification of the original osteotome technique presented by Summers. In addition to the clinical examination, the patients were asked to give their perception of the surgical procedure, utilizing a visual analogue scale. RESULTS: The cumulative survival rate of the osteotome-installed implants after a mean follow-up time of 3.2 years, was 97.4% (95% confidence intervals: 94.4-98.8%). From the 252 implants inserted, three were lost before loading and another three were lost in the first and second year. According to residual bone height the survival was 91.3% for implant sites with < or =4 mm residual bone height, and 90% for sites with 4 mm and 5 mm, when compared with that of 100% in sites with bone height of above 5 mm. According to implant length the survival rates were 100% for 12 mm, 98.7% for 10 mm, 98.7% for 8 mm and only 47.6% for 6 mm implants. Soft tissue parameters (pocket probing depth, probing attachment level, bleeding on probing and marginal bone levels) did not yield any differences between the osteotome-installed and the conventionally placed implants. More than 90% of the patients were satisfied with the implant therapy and would undergo similar therapy again if necessary. The cost associated with implant therapy was considered to be justified. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the osteotome technique was a reliable method for implant insertion in the posterior maxilla, especially at sites with 5 mm or more of preoperative residual bone height and a relatively flat sinus floor.