CAD/CAM Titanium Meshes for GBR: A Case Series with Preliminary Histologic Analysis.

Titanium has been proposed as a mesh material for guided bone regeneration (GBR) since the 1990s. To overcome difficulties in shaping and adapting meshes to the defect, digital techniques were introduced to digitally print meshes capable of fitting the bone perfectly, reproduced through the patient's CT scan. Five patients were included in this case series, and their CBCT data were acquired and sent to the producer of the titanium meshes. 3D regenerative surgery was performed with titanium meshes and a mix of demineralized bovine bone matrix (DBBM) and autogenous bone (1:1 ratio). Radiographic measures were evaluated on paraxial sections of the CBCT through a dedicated software. When possible, regenerated bone samples were obtained at implant insertion. Four out of five regenerated areas healed without local or systemic complications. One mesh was removed after 2 months and 2 weeks due to exposure. The mean vertical bone gain was 4.3 ± 1.5 mm (range: 2.5 to 7 mm). Two histologic samples were obtained. In sample 1, bone tissue area and graft material area were 44.4% and 12.5%, respectively; in sample 2, the same parameters were 15.6% and 16.9%, respectively.

CAD-CAM Titanium Meshes for GBR: A Case Series with Preliminary Histological Analysis.

Titanium has been proposed as a mesh material for GBR since the nineties. To overcome difficulties in shaping and adaptation to the defect, digital elaboration techniques were introduced to digitally print meshes capable of fitting the bone perfectly, reproduced through the CT scan of the patient. Five patients were included in this case series. CBCT data of patients were acquired and sent to the producer of the titanium mesh. 3-dimension regenerative surgery was performed with titanium meshes and a mix of Demineralized Bovine Bone Matrix (DBBM) and Autologous bone (1:1 ratio). Radiographic measures were evaluated on paraxial sections of the CBCT through a dedicated software. When possible, regenerated bone samples were obtained at implant insertion time. Four out of five regenerated areas healed without local and systemic complications. One mesh was removed after two months and two weeks because of exposition. Mean vertical bone gain was 4.3 ± 1.5 mm (range 2.5 - 7 mm). Two histologic samples were obtained. In sample n.1, Bone Tissue Area and Graft Material Area were respectively 44.4% and 12.5%. In sample n.2, the same parameters were 15.6% and 16.9% respectively.

Novel surfaces and osseointegration in implant dentistry.

Survival, differentiation capability, and activity of cells are strictly related to structural features and the composition of the extracellular matrix, and its variation affects tissue homeostasis. Placement of a dental implant in bone tissue activates a sequence of molecular and cellular events that lead to the apposition of newly-formed bone directly onto the titanium surface. Due to implant's interaction with the mineralized tissue, osseointegration is affected by the surface structure of the implanted material. Surface nanotopography and microtopography can modify the shape and activity of mesenchymal stem cells leading to a higher differentiation rate of these cells into osteogenic lineage with the upregulation of osteoblastic genes. Several approaches for implant surface modification are currently under investigation or have been recently proposed to improve osseointegration. Most surface treatments are aimed at the formation of a thick layer of titanium oxide, at the alteration of surface chemical composition by incorporating bioactive molecules and drugs, and at the creation of a surface topography that is more attractive for osteoblast differentiation, adhesion, and osteogenic activity. Data on the cellular-substrate interaction, as well as in vivo studies assessing the response to these novel surfaces, are reviewed in the present study. The application of modern surfaces in dental clinical practice might increase and accelerate implant osseointegration, but could also reduce the occurrence of peri-implant bone loss and favor the re-osseointegration of an affected surface.

Retrospective analysis of the prevalence of peri-implant diseases in non-smoking patients rehabilitated with a fixed full-arch restoration, supported by two mesial axial and two distal tilted implants.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the study was to evaluate the prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis in non-smoking patients rehabilitated with a fixed prosthesis supported by two axial and two tilted implants. METHODS: Forty-three patients with a total of 49 rehabilitations were included in the study. Each patient was included in a follow-up schedule consisting in a visit every six months during the first two years and every year thereafter in which professional oral hygiene was performed and data about bleeding on probing, probing depth and bone resorption were collected. Diagnoses of peri-implant mucositis (Bleeding Index>1) and peri-implantitis (Bleeding Index>1, probing depth >4, bone resorption radiographically detectable) were made. RESULTS: The considered observational time was from 1 to 10 years. The prevalence of peri-implant mucositis detected ranged from 0 to 12.2% of patients (8.7% of implants), while that of peri-implantitis varied between 0 and 9.1% of patients (6.8% of implants) in the different follow-up considered. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis was lower than in most of the studies in literature suggesting the feasibility of this kind of rehabilitation, in combination with a strict hygiene recall protocol, in preventing the onset of these diseases.

Implant success rates in full-arch rehabilitations supported by upright and tilted implants: a retrospective investigation with up to five years of follow-up.

PURPOSE: The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the cumulative success rate, the implant survival rate, and the occurrence of biological complications in implants supporting full-arch immediately loaded rehabilitations supported by upright and tilted implants. METHODS: The clinical records and periapical radiographs of patients who attended follow-up visits were collected, and information was recorded regarding marginal bone loss resorption, the occurrence of peri-implant infectious diseases, and the implant survival rate. Implants were classified as successful or not successful according to two distinct classifications for implant success. RESULTS: A total of 53 maxillary and mandibular restorations including 212 implants were analysed, of which 56 implants were studied over the full five-year follow-up period. After five years, the cumulative success rate was 76.04% according to the Misch classification and 56.34% according to the Albrektsson classification. The cumulative implant survival rate was 100%, although one implant was found to be affected by peri-implantitis at the second follow-up visit. CONCLUSIONS: The cumulative success rate of the implants dropped over time, corresponding to the progression of marginal bone resorption. The prevalence of peri-implantitis was very low, and the implant survival rate was not found to be related to the cumulative success rate.

Tilted implants for full-arch rehabilitations in completely edentulous maxilla: a retrospective study.

Purpose. The aims of this study were to assess the treatment outcome of immediately loaded full-arch fixed bridges anchored to both tilted and axially placed implants in the edentulous maxilla and to evaluate the incidence of biological and prosthetic complications. Materials and Methods. Thirty-four patients (18 women and 16 men) were included in the study. Each patient received a maxillary full-arch fixed bridge supported by two axial implants and two distal tilted implants. A total of 136 implants were inserted. Loading was applied within 48 hours of surgery and definitive restorations were placed 4 to 6 months later. Patients were scheduled for followup at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months and annually up to 5 years. At each followup plaque level and bleeding scores were assessed and every complication was recorded. Results. The overall follow-up range was 12 to 73 months (mean 38.8 months). No implant failures were recorded to date, leading to a cumulative implant survival rate of 100%. Biological complications were recorded such as alveolar mucositis (11.8% patients), peri-implantitis (5.9% patients), and temporomandibular joint pain (5.9% patients). The most common prosthetic complications were the fracture or detachment of one or multiple acrylic teeth in both the temporary (20.6% patients) and definitive (17.7% patients) prosthesis and the minor acrylic fractures in the temporary (14.7% patients) and definitive (2.9% patients) prosthesis. Hygienic complications occurred in 38.2% patients. No patients' dissatisfactions were recorded. Conclusions. The high cumulative implant survival rate indicates that this technique could be considered a viable treatment option. An effective recall program is important to early intercept and correct prosthetic and biologic complications in order to avoid implant and prosthetic failures.