Anodised or turned dental implants?

Data sourcesAn electronic search without time or language restrictions was undertaken using several databases: PubMed/Medline, Web of Science and the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register and ongoing clinical trials. Manual searches were performed in dental implant related journals and reference lists of identified studies, and relevant reviews were scanned for possible additional studies.Study selectionEligibility criteria included human clinical studies, either randomised or not, comparing implant failure rates, MBL and/or post-operative infection in any group of patients receiving turned (machined) and anodised-surface (TiUnite) implants, both from the same implant manufacturer.Data extraction and synthesisThe titles and abstracts of all reports identified through the electronic searches were read independently by the three authors. For studies appearing to meet the inclusion criteria, or for which there were insufficient data in the title and abstract to make a clear decision, the full report was obtained. Disagreements were resolved by discussion between the authors. Quality assessment of the studies was executed according to the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS), which is a quality assessment tool used when observational studies are also included in systematic reviews.ResultsThirty-eight publications were included. The results suggest a risk ratio =2.82(95%CI, 1.95 - 4.06, P < 0.00001) for failure of turned implants when compared to anodised-surface implants. Sensitivity analyses showed similar results when only the studies inserting implants in maxillae or mandibles were pooled. There were no statistically significant effects of turned implants on the MBL (mean difference [MD]=0.02, (95%CI, 0.16 - 0.20; P = 0 82) in comparison to anodised implants. The results of a meta-regression considering the follow-up period as a covariate suggested an increase of the MD with the increase in the follow-up time (MD increase 0.012 mm year 1), however, without a statistical significance (P = 0.813). Due to lack of satisfactory information, meta-analysis for the outcome 'post-operative infection' was not performed.ConclusionsWithin the limitations of the existing investigations, the present study suggests that turned implants have a statistically higher probability to fail than anodised-surface implants, regardless of whether the implants were placed in maxilla or mandible. There were no statistically significant effects of turned implants on the MBL when compared with anodised implants. A comparison of post-operative infection between the implant types was not possible, due to lack of sufficient information. The reliability and validity of the data collected, the limitations of the quality assessment tool and the potential for biases and confounding factors are some of the shortcomings of the present study. The results have to be interpreted with caution due to the presence of several confounding factors in the included studies.

Are fibre posts associated with the occurrence of prosthetic complications?

Data sourcesThe Pubmed, Evidence-Based Dentistry, BMJ Clinical Evidence, EmbaseDynamed, and www.opengrey.eu databases and manual search of reference lists.Study selectionRandomised clinical trials (RCTs) were accepted if they had: participants with no periodontal disease and teeth restored with SCs or FDPs and compared fibre posts and other prosthetic systems and evaluated the prosthetic complications with a minimum observational period of 36 months.Data extraction and synthesisTitles and abstracts were evaluated independently by two reviewers, any disagreement was discussed with a third reviewer. The agreement for the two reviewers was 97%. The quality and the risk of bias of the studies included was assessed following the Cochrane Handbook considering the domains of randomisation, sample size, inclusion and exclusion criteria, follow-up achieved, blinding, withdrawing and groups' compatibility for quality assessment, and for the risk of bias the domains evaluated were allocation concealment, blinding of outcome assessor and follow-up.ResultsThe database search yielded 4,230 records; after duplications removal, 3,670 records were reviewed independently by the authors, and four articles were chosen to include in the systematic review.The most frequently reported failures in the available studies were as follows: fibre post debonding, loss of retention of single crowns and marginal gaps. Less frequently, chippings and fractures were recorded in SCs. No studies about complications related to FDPs were found.The failure rate ranged from 0 to 28.2%.ConclusionsA correlation between the failure rates of fibre posts and the type of prosthetic restoration (SCs or FDPs ) cannot be found. Further RCTs are required to achieve evidence-based conclusions, particularly about the use of fibre posts with FDPs.

Clinical Considerations of Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome for Implant Dentistry: Two Case Reports.

Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (EDS) is a group of congenital connective tissue disorders that commonly affect joints, muscles, soft tissue, and blood circulation in the affected population. Many oral manifestations are displayed in EDS patients that can include gingival recession, lack of attached gingiva, early severe periodontal disease, and dental caries. However, the literature is limited and oftentimes contradictory regarding dental implants in EDS patients. The aim of this study is to report two successful cases of implants placed in EDS patients, one treated with bone augmentation and both restored with prosthetic implant rehabilitations. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2023;43:e81-e87. doi: 10.11607/prd.5842.

Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome in Prosthodontics, Periodontology, and Implant Dentistry: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (EDS) is one of the most common congenital connective tissue disorders, affecting the synthesis and production of collagen cells. The medical implications for joints, muscles, soft tissue, and blood circulation have been documented in the literature. Many oral manifestations are displayed in EDS patients, including gingival recession, lack of attached gingiva, early severe periodontitis, and dental anomalies and dental caries. However, the literature is limited and oftentimes contradictory, and therefore provides no consensus for guidelines regarding prosthodontic, periodontal, and implant treatment of patients with EDS. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review was to analyze the pertinent literature regarding prosthodontics, periodontology, and implant dentistry in EDS patients.

The Customized Alveolar Ridge-Splitting (CARS) Technique Combined with Guided Bone Regeneration or Sinus Elevation Augmentation in Maxillary Deficient Ridges.

Various techniques have been proposed to regenerate deficient ridges after tooth removal, including guided bone regeneration, block grafting, distraction osteogenesis, and ridge splitting. However, these procedures are technique-sensitive and often present complications which prevent reconstruction of the deficient ridge and implant placement. In an atrophic anterior or posterior maxilla, these techniques often fail to produce satisfactory long-term outcomes due to the poor bone quality, pneumatization of the maxillary sinus, and the highly cosmetic patient demands. The customized alveolar ridge-splitting (CARS) technique was introduced to improve outcomes and minimize the risk of complications. The synergistic combination of this technique with another augmentation procedure-including lateral window sinus augmentation and guided bone regeneration-allows implant placement into ridges with deficient bone volume both vertically and horizontally. This study presents two case reports that were successfully treated with the CARS technique and additional augmentation techniques to treat severely atrophic ridges in the anterior and posterior maxilla.

Surgical Strategies Used to Successfully Re-implant an Implant that Failed Four Times at the Same Site: A Case Report.

Although implants have been shown to have high success rates, complications such as implant failure can occur. This presents a challenging dilemma for clinicians when attempting another implant placement in the failed site. The patient in this clinical case report presented with implant failure four times at the same site. This case report describes implant placement in a site where four failed implants were previously removed and evaluates the approach used to achieve a successful outcome.

Are Cannabis and Electronic Cigarettes Risks for Early Sinus Lift Failures?

To achieve restorative success for esthetic cases a process is needed that can be reproduced repeatedly. As with any process there are critical steps that must be followed to ensure accurate and precise results. This article outlines a verification process of provisional restorations in order to obtain appropriate esthetics, phonetics, and function. Additionally, the article discusses how newly created contours can be transferred intraorally to the laboratory benchtop and then to the final restorations. Through the process of verification, the clinician can establish restorative predictability to enhance the restorative success of any esthetic case.

Histologic Findings 8 Weeks After Customized Alveolar Ridge-Splitting Technique.

Different techniques have been introduced when replacement with an implant is planned after tooth extraction. The conventional approach consists of waiting 3 to 4 months before implant placement. However, many other options are available for implant placement, including immediate implant placement (IIP), IIP and immediate provisionalization (IIPIP), and early implant placement (EIP). When the ridge is deficient, guided bone regeneration (GBR) with simultaneous implant placement is often performed. However, this procedure has potential for postoperative complications and patient discomfort, as well as an extended treatment time. The recent introduction of the Customized Alveolar Ridge-Splitting (CARS) technique can help avoid many of these problems and treat atrophic ridges that will require two or three GBR surgeries. The purpose of this case report is to demonstrate the step-by-step surgical and restorative procedures for the CARS technique and present histologic data of the new bone generated utilizing this technique.

A New Concept of Safety Distance to Place Implants in the Area of the Inferior Alveolar Canal to Avoid Neurosensory Disturbance.

Inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) damage following implant placement is a severe complication that can compromise a patient's quality of life. Previous studies have suggested that a safety zone of 2 mm, if maintained, might avoid this problem. This retrospective study evaluates implants placed in closer proximity to the IAN without resulting in any postoperative neurologic complications and suggests a new concept of safety distance. A total of 60 consecutive patients receiving 101 mandibular implants < 2 mm from the IAN were included in this study. All enrolled patients had a CBCT scan done for radiologic assessment before implant placement and following final restoration. Measurements were obtained through cross-sectional views using Simplant software. In patients without neurologic disturbances, a mean distance of +0.75 mm was seen from the closest portion of the implant to the nerve bundle. In cases where a direct transection and/or compression of the nerve was not observed, the patients did not experience neurosensory disturbances.

Patient-Related Risk Factors for Maxillary Sinus Augmentation Procedures: A Systematic Literature Review.

The posterior maxilla has traditionally presented a challenge for successful placement of dental implants due to a combination of poor bone quality, ridge atrophy, and pneumatization of the sinus floor following tooth extraction. However, with the successful and predictable surgical outcomes reported in the literature, more clinicians and patients are choosing an implant-supported restoration in the edentulous posterior maxilla. Consequently, sinus elevation and augmentation have gained more popularity. Extensive research has been conducted on types of bone graft materials and implants, less-invasive techniques to perform sinus augmentation, and timing for implant placement for sinus grafting. Despite the predictability of the techniques and biomaterials employed in sinus grafting procedures, intra- and postoperative complications are common. Much of the current literature discusses the local risk factors related to sinus augmentation, with few studies focusing on the patient-related risk factors. The purpose of this review is to identify, evaluate, and discuss the possible management of patient-related risk factors to allow for more predictable maxillary sinus floor augmentation outcomes.

An Algorithmic Approach to Evaluation of an Ailing Implant.

With the incidence of failed and ailing dental implants increasing, the authors conducted research to evaluate and characterize all known criteria used in the assessment of implant health in the clinical setting. A review of articles found in electronic databases was performed. Once all parameters for implant assessment as supported by current literature were selected, implant assessment documents were created: a data acquisition form and a quantitative comprehensive evaluation. These documents provide the clinician an algorithm that yields a prognosis of survival for each implant. Diagnostic criteria were organized to offer a comprehensive assessment of risk factors related to implant health. Data acquisition prior to establishing the prognosis is necessary in accordance with the staging system developed. Parameters for diagnosis and staging include a thorough medical/social history of the patient, implant history, and clinical evaluation. The authors concluded that the establishment of parameters for comprehensive implant evaluation in the clinical setting is feasible. This assessment process enables an effective clinical approach to evaluate and treat ailing implants while facilitating a clinical diagnostic algorithm.