Advancements in tooth autotransplantation.

BACKGROUND: Tooth autotransplantation (AT) involves the surgical relocation of a tooth from 1 site in the mouth to another site within the same patient. This approach is a good option in a growing patient when dental implant placements or fixed bridges are not suitable and when preserving natural teeth is a priority. Tooth AT is a complex procedure that requires specialized skills from a multidisciplinary team with careful patient and tooth selection and treatment planning. TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED: The authors provided a review of the state of knowledge and research on tooth AT and presented a case scenario and barriers to adoption, with a focus on the United States. RESULTS: Success rates for tooth AT can vary depending on several factors, including the patient's overall health, specific tooth involved, skill of the dental surgeon, and postoperative care provided. Long-term outcomes of autotransplanted teeth have been cited in the literature with impressive longitudinal follow-up spanning up to 26 years. Results of several systematic reviews showed survival rates from 75% through 98%. CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Adoption of tooth AT has grown over the years, owing to advancements in dental techniques, improved patient outcomes, and increased awareness among both dentists and patients. Increasing awareness and availability of tooth AT to replace missing teeth can provide a natural and functional alternative to traditional prosthetic options. Tooth AT helps preserve the alveolar bone in growing patients and can offer excellent esthetic and functional outcomes.

A 5-Year Esthetic RCT Assessment of Anterior Maxillary Single-Tooth Implants with Different Abutment Interfaces.

PURPOSE: This study sought to define the tissue responses at different implant-abutment interfaces by studying bone and peri-implant mucosal changes using a 5-year prospective randomized clinical trial design study. The conus interface was compared with the flat-to-flat interface and platform-switched implant-abutment systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred forty-one subjects were recruited and randomized to the three treatment groups according to defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Following implant placement and immediate provisionalization in healed alveolar ridges, clinical, photographic, and radiographic parameters were measured at 6 months and annually for 5 years. The calculated changes in marginal bone levels, peri-implant mucosal zenith location, papillae lengths, and peri-implant Plaque Index and bleeding on probing were statistically compared. RESULTS: Forty-eight conus interface implants, 49 flat-to-flat interface implants, and 44 platform-switched implants were placed in 141 subjects. Six platform-switched interface and eight flatto- flat interface implants failed, most of them within 3 months. After 5 years, 33 conical interface, 28 flat-to-flat interface, and 27 platform-switched interface implants remained for evaluation. Calculation of marginal bone level change showed a mean marginal bone loss of -0.16 ± 0.45 (-1.55 to 0.65), -0.92 ± 0.70 (-2.90 to 0.20), and -0.81 ± 1.06 (-3.35 to 1.35) mm for conical interface, flat-to-flat interface, and platform-switched interface implants, respectively (P < .0005). The peri-implant mucosal zenith changes were minimal for all three interface designs (0.10 mm and +0.08 mm, P > .60). Only 16% to 19% of the surfaces had presence of bleeding on probing, with no significant differences (P > .81) between groups. Interproximal tissue changes were positive and similar among the implant interface designs. CONCLUSION: Over 5 years, the immediate provisionalization protocol resulted in stable peri-implant mucosal responses for all three interfaces. Compared with the flat-to-flat and platform-switched interfaces, the conical interface implants demonstrated significantly less early marginal bone loss. The relationship of marginal bone responses and mucosal responses requires further experimental consideration.

Use of Overdenture Implants in the Management of a Failed Long-term Transosteal Implant Prosthesis.

The rehabilitation of failing implant-supported overdentures often can become a complicated endeavor. The task of restoring a case in which the implant(s) is fractured or is old and has been discontinued with no replacement parts available frequently is quite problematic. This article describes the use of the LOCATOR® Overdenture Implant (LODI) to rehabilitate a patient with a mandibular implant-retained overdenture following the failure of her 32-year-old transosteal implant.

Three-Year Prospective Randomized Comparative Assessment of Anterior Maxillary Single Implants with Different Abutment Interfaces.

PURPOSE: The goal of this investigation was to define time-dependent peri-implant tissue changes at implants with different abutment interface designs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Participants requiring replacement of single maxillary anterior and first premolar teeth were recruited and treated under an institutional review board (IRB)-approved protocol. Implants, titanium abutments, and provisional crowns were placed in healed ridges 5 months following preservation after tooth extraction with recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2). Twelve weeks later, permanent crowns were placed on patient-specific abutments and evaluated at 6, 12, and 36 months following implant placement. Clinical and radiographic assessments of abutments and crowns, peri-implant mucosa, and marginal bone levels were recorded. RESULTS: The 3-year assessment included 45 conical interface (CI), 34 flat-to-flat interface (FI), and 32 platform-switched interface (PS) implants in 111 participants. At 3 years, the mean marginal bone level (MBL) change at CI, FI, and PS implants was -0.12, -1.02, and -1.04 mm, respectively (P = .014). "Zero" MBL loss or gain was measured over the 3-year period at 72.1% CI, 3.0% FI, and 16.6% PS implants. There was a minor change (0.0 to 0.3 mm) in peri-implant mucosal zenith positions over time and between groups. Eighty percent of CI implants, 61% of FI implants, and 84% of PS implants were observed to have a clinically stable peri-implant mucosal zenith position with less than 0.5 mm of measured recession. Over the 36-month period, there were no significant changes in the location of mesial or distal papilla in any group. CONCLUSION: Significant differences in MBLs were observed at different implant interfaces. Conical implant interfaces, but not flat-to-flat or platform-switched implant interfaces, were associated with no MBL changes over 3 years. Peri-implant mucosal stability was generally observed. The relationship of marginal bone responses and peri-implant mucosal stability requires further evaluation.

A multimodal analgesic protocol may reduce opioid use after third molar surgery: A pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to assess the number of opioid doses available to patients from filled prescriptions after adoption, in 2017, of a multimodal analgesic protocol that included opioid prescribing to manage postoperative pain. STUDY DESIGN: Data were retrieved from records of the first 24 patients having third molar surgery in 2017 identified from appointment schedules. Inclusion criteria were American Society of Anesthesiologists risk classification I or II, age 18 to 35 years, and at least 2 lower third molars removed. The exclusion criterion was being treated for opioid addiction/abuse. The primary outcome variable was the number of opioid doses filled by prescriptions at each patient's discretion. The primary predictor variable was the multimodal analgesic protocol. RESULTS: Data from records of 24 consecutive patients were analyzed; 83% were females. Median age was 25 years (interquartile range [IQR] 12-29 years). Median surgery time was 35 minutes (IQR 27-32 minutes). The median number of opioid doses filled in 2017 was 4 (IQR 0-4). CONCLUSIONS: The outcomes from this pilot study suggest that implementation of a multimodal analgesic protocol to manage postoperative pain, while limiting the number of opioid doses available to the patient, may be an effective strategy for a wider range of patients and procedures.

Comparing panoramic radiographs and cone beam computed tomography: Impact on radiographic features and differential diagnoses.

OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to determine whether lesion features appear differently on panoramic radiography (PAN) and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), and whether the use of CBCT affects diagnostic accuracy and observers' confidence in comparison with PAN. STUDY DESIGN: Three oral and maxillofacial radiologists reviewed 33 sets of PAN images and CBCT volumes of biopsy-proven lesions. They described 12 different lesion features and provided up to 3 ranked differential diagnoses, as well as their confidence with respect to those diagnoses. Their confidence was weighted by the rank at which the correct diagnosis was provided. RESULTS: Odds ratios (ORs) were statistically significant for border definition (OR = 5.45; P = .004), continuity of border cortication (OR = 0.34; P = .035), effect on neurovascular canals (OR = 6.38; P = .043), expansion (OR = 18.56; P < .001), cortical thinning (OR = 30.22; P < .001), and cortical destruction (OR = 9.80; P < .001). There was no association between the 2 modalities and the rank at which the correct differential diagnoses were made or the observers' weighted confidence. CONCLUSIONS: Before acquiring a CBCT scan to aid in the diagnosis of an intraosseous lesion, clinicians should consider the diagnostic information that is expected to be gained. In this study, although there were differences between PAN and CBCT with respect to some lesion features, CBCT did not help improve diagnostic accuracy.

Buffered 1% Lidocaine With Epinephrine Can Be as Effective as Nonbuffered 2% Lidocaine With Epinephrine for Maxillary Field Block.

PURPOSE: Buffering local anesthetics with epinephrine (Epi) offers clinicians options not often considered. This study assessed outcomes for pulpal anesthesia, pain on injection, and time to midface numbness for buffered 1% lidocaine with 1:100,000 Epi versus nonbuffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 Epi. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this trial with a randomized, crossover design, buffered 1% lidocaine was compared with nonbuffered 2% lidocaine. Subjects were adult volunteers who served as their own controls. The predictor variables were alternate drug formulations. The outcome variables were subjects' responses to cold and electric pulp testing (EPT) stimulation of the maxillary first molar and canine, pain levels during the injection, and time to midface numbness. After maxillary field blocks with 40 mg of buffered lidocaine or 80 mg of nonbuffered lidocaine, subjects reported pain on injection and responses of the maxillary first molar and canine after cold and EPT stimulation. Teeth were tested before field block and at 30-minute intervals until a positive response was detected. Two weeks later, subjects were tested with the alternate drug combinations. For all outcome variables, assessment of treatment difference, calculated as 1% buffered minus 2% nonbuffered, was performed with the Wilcoxon rank sum test with significance at P < .05. RESULTS: More of the 24 subjects were women and Caucasian. The median age was 23.5 years (interquartile range, 21, 25 years), and the median body weight was 155 lb (interquartile range, 128.5, 176.5 lb). Pain levels during the injection were significantly lower for 1% buffered lidocaine, with P = .04. Times to response after injection were not significantly different between the 2 drug formulations for the cold test on a molar, with P = .08, or the cold test on a canine, with P = .22. However, times to response were significantly longer for nonbuffered drugs for EPT on the molar and canine, both with P = .01. CONCLUSIONS: Buffering 1% lidocaine with 1:100,000 Epi reduces the pain on injection with a maxillary field block and results in similar lengths of pulpal anesthesia tested with a cold stimulus as compared with nonbuffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 Epi.

Buffered 1% Lidocaine With Epinephrine Is as Effective as Non-Buffered 2% Lidocaine With Epinephrine for Mandibular Nerve Block.

PURPOSE: To assess outcomes for pulpal anesthesia and pain on injection for buffered 1% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine (EPI) versus non-buffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 EPI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a randomized cross-over trial approved by the institutional review board, buffered 1% lidocaine with 1:100,000 EPI was compared with non-buffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 EPI. After mandibular nerve block with buffered lidocaine 40 mg or non-buffered lidocaine 80 mg, patients reported responses at the mandibular first molar and canine after cold and electrical pulp testing (EPT). Patients also reported pain on injection with a 10-point Likert-type scale. Teeth were tested before nerve block and at 30-minute intervals until a positive response returned. Two weeks later, patients were tested with the alternate drug combinations. The same outcomes were assessed. Predictor variables were alternate drug formulations. Outcome variables were patients' responses to cold and EPT stimulation of the mandibular first molar and canine and pain on injection. An assessment of treatment difference was performed using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests with Proc NPAR1WAY (SAS 9.3, SAS Institute, Cary, NC). Significance was set at a P value less than .05. RESULTS: Fifty-seven percent of patients were women and 43% were men. Seventy percent were Caucasian, 17% were African American, and 13% had another ethnicity. Median age was 25 years (interquartile range [IQR], 21-26 yr) and median body weight was 140 lbs (IQR, 120-155 lbs). After the cold test and EPT, the time to sensation return for the molar or canine was not statistically different between the 2 drug formulations. Patients reported significantly lower pain scores with the buffered versus non-buffered drug (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: After mandibular nerve block, buffered 1% lidocaine with EPI can produce similar clinical outcomes for duration of pulpal anesthesia as non-buffered 2% lidocaine with EPI and lower pain on injections, which are a potential benefit to patients.

Buffered Versus Non-Buffered Lidocaine With Epinephrine for Mandibular Nerve Block: Clinical Outcomes.

PURPOSE: Outcomes for peak blood levels were assessed for buffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine compared with non-buffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this institutional review board-approved prospective, randomized, double-blinded, crossover trial, the clinical impact of buffered 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine (Anutra Medical, Research Triangle Park, Cary, NC) was compared with the non-buffered drug. Venous blood samples for lidocaine were obtained 30 minutes after a mandibular nerve block with 80 mg of the buffered or unbuffered drug. Two weeks later, the same subjects were tested with the alternate drug combinations. Subjects also reported on pain on injection with a 10-point Likert-type scale and time to lower lip numbness. The explanatory variable was the drug formulation. Outcome variables were subjects' peak blood lidocaine levels, subjective responses to pain on injection, and time to lower lip numbness. Serum lidocaine levels were analyzed with liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. Statistical analyses were performed using Proc TTEST (SAS 9.3; SAS Institute, Cary, NC), with the crossover option for a 2-period crossover design, to analyze the normally distributed outcome for pain. For non-normally distributed outcomes of blood lidocaine levels and time to lower lip numbness, an assessment of treatment difference was performed using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests with Proc NPAR1WAY (SAS 9.3). Statistical significance was set at a P value less than .05 for all outcomes. RESULTS: Forty-eight percent of subjects were women, half were Caucasian, 22% were African American, and 13% were Asian. Median age was 21 years (interquartile range [IQR], 20-22 yr), and median body weight was 147 lb (IQR, 130-170 lb). Median blood levels (44 blood samples) at 30 minutes were 1.19 µg/L per kilogram of body weight. Mean blood level differences of lidocaine for each patient were significantly lower after nerve block with the buffered drug compared with the non-buffered agent (P < .01). Mean score for pain on injection for nerve block (n = 46 scores) was 3.3 (standard deviation, 0.9). Seventy-eight percent of subjects reported lower or the same pain scores with the buffered drug; 61% of subjects reported a shorter time to lower lip numbness with the buffered drug. CONCLUSIONS: Buffering 2% lidocaine with epinephrine can produce clinical outcomes favorable for subjects and clinicians without clinically detrimental peak blood lidocaine levels.

A multicenter randomized comparative trial of implants with different abutment interfaces to replace anterior maxillary single teeth.

PURPOSE: The implant-abutment interface may affect peri-implant mucosal architecture, and influence health and esthetics. The goal of this 1-year follow-up report of a 5-year clinical investigation was to examine the peri-implant mucosal tissue responses to different implant-abutment interface designs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Subjects requiring an anterior maxillary implant were recruited. Tooth extractions, with or without preservation or ridge augmentation procedures, were performed as required. After 5 months of healing, one of three different implant-abutment combinations (conical interface [CI] n = 48); flat-to-flat interface [FI] n = 49); or platform switch interface [PS] n = 44) was placed and provisionalized. Twelve weeks later, permanent crowns were placed and data gathered throughout the first year. Peri-implant mucosal architecture and bone levels were evaluated clinically, photographically, and radiographically. RESULTS: At 1 year, seven FI and six PS implants failed and two FI and two PS implant participants were lost to follow-up, resulting in survival rates of 100% (CI), 85.7% (FI), and 86.4% (PS) (90.8% overall). Marginal bone level changes were -0.22 mm (CI, P < .05), -1.2 mm (FI, P < .05), and -1.32 mm (PS, P < .05) after 1 year. Marginal bone level stability (≤ 0.5-mm bone loss or gain) was recorded for 87% (CI), 8% (FI), and 27% (PS) of implants. Measurement of midbuccal mucosal zenith and papilla positions revealed no change in the mucosal positions and 0.2 to 0.3 mm of gain in papilla dimensions in all groups. CONCLUSION: Significant differences in marginal bone loss were observed among the three implant-abutment interfaces. At 1 year follow-up, changes in the buccal mucosal zenith position or papilla dimensions were not discernable. A continued longitudinal evaluation of peri-implant bone and mucosal changes around these different interfaces is ongoing.

Dual jaw treatment of edentulism using implant-supported monolithic zirconia fixed prostheses.

UNLABELLED: This case report describes restoration of the edentulous maxilla and mandible with implant supported fixed prostheses using monolithic zirconia, where the incisal edges and occluding surfaces were made of monolithic zirconia. Edentulism is a debilitating condition that can be treated with either a removable or fixed dental prosthesis. The most common type of implant-supported fixed prosthesis is the metal acrylic (hybrid), with ceramo-metal prostheses being used less commonly in complete edentulism. However, both of these prostheses designs are associated with reported complications of screw loosening or fracture and chipping of acrylic resin and porcelain. Monolithic zirconia implant-supported fixed prostheses have the potential for reduction of such complications. In this case, the CAD/CAM concept was utilized in fabrication of maxillary and mandibular screw-retained implant-supported fixed prostheses using monolithic zirconia. Proper treatment planning and execution coupled with utilizing advanced technologies contributes to highly esthetic results. However, long-term studies are required to guarantee a satisfactory long-term outcome of this modality of treatment. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This case report describes the clinical and technical procedures involved in fabrication of maxillary and mandibular implant-supported fixed prostheses using monolithic zirconia as a treatment of edentulism, and proposes the possible advantages associated with using monolithic zirconia in eliminating dissimilar interfaces in such prostheses that are accountable for the most commonly occurring technical complication for these prostheses being chipping and fracture of the veneering material.

Immediate provisionalization of dental implants in grafted alveolar ridges in the esthetic zone: a 5-year evaluation.

This clinical study assessed at 5 years both implant survival and peri-implant tissue architecture of immediately provisionalized implants placed 4 to 6 months following augmentation with demineralized bovine bone allograft and collagen membrane. Of 23 implants in 19 patients, one implant failed prior to loading (95.6% survival). Implant tissue relationships were stable following implant placement; marginal bone level changes from implant placement to 5 years (mean ± SD: -0.18 ± 0.79 mm, range: -1.6 to 1.4 mm, P = .51), the mesial and distal papilla length changes (mesial mean ± SD: 1.14 ± 0.92 mm, P < .001; distal mean ± SD: 0.74 ± 1.46 mm, P = .04), and the unchanged mucosal zenith location (mean ± SD: 0.24 ± 0.93 mm, P = .15) were recorded. There were no major surgical complications during the 5-year period. When augmentation is required, subsequent dental implant placement in the anterior maxilla may be achieved using immediate placement and provisionalization protocol to attain osseointegration success and stable peri-implant tissue responses.

Immediate provisionalization of dental implants placed in healed alveolar ridges and extraction sockets: a 5-year prospective evaluation.

PURPOSE: This 5-year prospective multicenter study compared implant survival and success, peri-implant health and soft tissue responses, crestal bone level stability, and complication rates following immediate loading of single OsseoSpeed implants placed in anterior maxillary healed ridges or extraction sockets. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Individuals requiring anterior tooth replacement with single implants were treated and immediately provisionalized. Definitive all-ceramic crowns were placed at 12 weeks. Implant survival, bone levels, soft tissue levels, and peri-implant health were monitored for 5 years. RESULTS: One hundred thirteen patients received implants in fresh sockets (55) and healed ridges (58). After 5 years, 45 and 49 patients remained for evaluation, respectively. During the first year, three implants failed in the extraction socket group (94.6% survival) and one implant failed in the healed ridge group (98.3% survival); this difference was not significant. No further implant failures were recorded. After 5 years, the interproximal crestal bone levels were located a mean of 0.43 ± 0.63 mm and 0.38 ± 0.62 mm from the reference points of implants in sockets and healed ridges (not a significant difference). In both groups, papillae increased over time and peri-implant mucosal zenith positions were stable from the time of definitive crown placement in sockets and healed ridges. Compared to flap surgery for implants in healed ridges, flapless surgery resulted in increased peri-implant mucosal tissue dimension (average, 0.78 ± 1.34 mm vs 0.19 ± 0.79 mm). CONCLUSION: After 5 years, the bone and soft tissue parameters that characterize implant success and contribute to dental implant esthetics were similar following the immediate provisionalization of implants in sockets and healed ridges. The overall tissue responses and reported implant survival support the immediate provisionalization of dental implants in situations involving healed ridges and, under ideal circumstances, extraction sockets.

Complications and patient-centered outcomes with an implant-supported monolithic zirconia fixed dental prosthesis: 1 year results.

PURPOSE: To characterize the number and type of complications that occur with a monolithic zirconia fixed dental prosthesis (MZ-FDP) supported by four endosseous implants in the edentulous mandible over time and to quantify the impact of treatment on oral health quality of life (OHQoL). METHODS: Seventeen edentulous participants were enrolled. New conventional dentures were fabricated for each participant. Four Astra Tech Osseospeed TX implants (Dentsply) were then placed in the parasymphyseal mandible, and after a period of healing, a full-arch monolithic zirconia prosthesis (Zirkonzahn) was inserted. Complication data were recorded and OHQoL was evaluated using the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-49), administered on four occasions: enrollment; implant surgery; and 6- and 12-month recalls. RESULTS: Sixty-eight implants were placed in 17 edentulous individuals aged 30 to 78 (mean 57.9 years). Implant survival was 94% from the subject perspective and 99% from the implant perspective. Prosthesis survival was 88%. Twelve complications occurred in ten participants, whereas seven participants remained complication free. Both OHIP-49 severity and extent scores decreased significantly between enrollment and 12-month recall (p < 0.001). The mean OHIP-49 severity score at baseline was 94.8 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 73.9, 115.8) and declined an average of 76.8 (95% CI: -91.3, -62.3) units per participant. The mean OHIP-49 extent score at baseline was 17.2 (95% CI: 10.8, 23.6) and declined 16.3 (95% CI: -20.2, -12.4) units per participant on average. CONCLUSIONS: Implant survival was high, and few complications related to the MZ-FDP were observed. The most common prosthetic complication was tooth chipping in the opposing maxillary denture, which accounted for 50% of all complication events. Substantial and clinically important improvements in OHQoL were achieved with both conventional dentures and the implant-supported MZ-FDP. The data of this short-term study indicate that the implant-supported MZ-FDP is a therapeutic option with particular advantages in the edentulous mandible that warrants further long-term study.

The effect of implant-supported removable partial dentures on oral health quality of life.

PURPOSE: Removable partial dentures (RPDs) represent standard treatment for partial edentulism despite major shortcomings. To alleviate these shortcomings, endosseous implants provide support and stability as well as contribute to maintenance of alveolar bone. This prospective, within subject, time series study evaluated patient-based outcomes of RPDs compared to implant-supported removable partial dentures (ISRPDs). The study hypothesis was that the ISRPD would substantially improve oral health quality of life for patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventeen patients requesting new mandibular Kennedy I or II RPDs received one 6-mm dental implant in one or both of the posterior edentulous areas. After healing, conventional RPDs were fabricated and delivered. Twelve weeks later, second-stage surgery was performed, and ball abutments with Clix attachments were inserted, thereby converting the prostheses to ISRPDs. Oral health quality of life was evaluated using the 49-item Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-49) questionnaire. The OHIP-49 was administered prior to treatment (baseline), at 6 and 12 weeks following RPD delivery and at 6 and 12 weeks following ISRPD conversion. Radiographic evaluation was performed at 6 and 12 weeks following ISRPD conversion. In statistical analysis, a fixed-slope random intercept variance components model took account of the multiple observations per person over time. RESULTS: In 17 subjects, 29 of 30 implants survived. The failed implant was replaced without complications. Abutment complications were limited to one abutment loosening and one attachment replacement. Minor prosthodontic complications were recorded. The OHIP-49 score reduced by 11.8 points, on average, at 12 weeks following ISRPD conversion (P = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Patients reported improved oral health following conversion to an ISRPD from RPD. The ISRPD involving short implants is one treatment option that should be considered when treatment planning Kennedy Class I and II patients.

Development and applications of porous tantalum trabecular metal-enhanced titanium dental implants.

BACKGROUND: Porous tantalum trabecular metal has recently been incorporated in titanium dental implants as a new form of implant surface enhancement. However, there is little information on the applications of this material in implant dentistry. PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to summarize the contemporary concept on the applications of porous tantalum trabecular metal in implant dentistry. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We therefore review the current literature on the basic science and clinical uses of this material. RESULTS: Porous tantalum metal is used to improve the contact between osseous structure and dental implants and therefore presumably facilitate osseointegration. Success of porous tantalum metal in orthopedic implants led to the incorporation of porous tantalum metal in the design of root-form endosseous titanium implants. The porous tantalum three-dimensional enhancement of titanium dental implant surface allows for combining bone ongrowth together with bone ingrowth, or osseoincorporation. While little is known about the biological aspect of the porous tantalum in the oral cavity, there seems to be several possible advantages of this implant design. This article reviews the biological aspects of porous tantalum-enhanced titanium dental implants, in particular the effects of anatomical consideration and oral environment to implant designs. CONCLUSIONS: We propose here possible clinical situations and applications for this type of dental implant. Advantages and disadvantages of the implants as well as needed future clinical studies are discussed.

Three-years clinical outcome of immediate provisionalization of single Osseospeed(™) implants in extraction sockets and healed ridges.

AIM: The purpose of this prospective multicenter clinical study was to compare 3 years implant survival, bone and soft tissue changes following immediate loading using single Osseospeed(™) implants (Astra Tech AB, Mölndal, Sweden) installed in healed ridges or extraction sockets. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Implants were provisionally restored the day of surgery using cemented acrylic crowns out of full occlusion. The provisional crowns were replaced after 12 weeks by full-ceramic crowns. Implant survival, bone levels, soft tissue levels and peri-implant health were monitored up to 3 years. RESULTS: 55 patients (22 men, 33 women; mean age 45) had the implant installed in extraction sockets and 58 patients (25 men, 33 women; mean age 42) received conventional implant treatment in healed ridges. Three implants failed in the extraction group and one implant failed in the healed group, all failures occurred before the final crown placement. No further losses occurred during 3 years, giving a statistically comparable survival rate of 94.6% and 98.3%, respectively. The total bone loss after 3 years, compared to implant placement was 0.4 mm (SD 1.5) in healed sites, whilst the immediate sites showed a bone gain of 1.6 mm (SD 2.4) due to bone fill in the alveolus. Papillae retracted with 0.3 and 0.0 mm in the period of provisionalization, but grew back after final crown was placed with 0.3 and 0.5 mm in extraction and healed sites respectively after 3 years. Plaque and inflammation scores were very low throughout the study time, irrespective of treatment modality. CONCLUSIONS: Immediate implants restored at the day of surgery show comparable risk for implant failure, bone loss and midfacial soft tissue recession compared to conventionally installed implants. The 3-years results suggest both hard and soft tissue stability.

Evaluation of post-implant buccal bone resorption using cone beam computed tomography: a clinical pilot study.

PURPOSE: Buccal bone responses following dental implant placement are considered significant determinants of esthetic outcomes. The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate whether cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) could be used to measure buccal alveolar bone changes following implant placement. The second aim of this investigation was to determine both qualitatively and quantitatively if changes could be determined 1 year postoperatively at the buccal aspect of implants placed in healed ridges or extraction sockets. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty patients in need of a single tooth in the maxillary anterior or first premolar region were recruited under an institutional review board-approved protocol. Patients were allocated into two groups: those missing a tooth with a healed alveolar ridge and those needing an extraction. Following treatment planning, implants were placed and immediately loaded. Zirconia abutments and all-ceramic crowns were delivered 16 weeks following implant placement. CBCT images of the maxilla were obtained at three different time points; 2 weeks before surgery, immediately after surgery, and 12 months after implant placement. A single examiner measured each implant three times in four different sites. The data between different implants or subjects were compared among groups by the nonparametric sign test. RESULTS: Evaluation of the CBCT images revealed that it was possible to discern the presence or absence of the buccal bone plate both prior to and 1 year following implant placement in the majority of subjects. The median alteration after 1 year for the vertical distance from the abutment/implant interface to the buccal alveolar bone crest for all subjects was -1.12 mm (P = .018). The horizontal alteration of the buccal bone measured 1 mm apical to the implant/abutment interface was -0.62 mm (P = .004). At the midimplant and apical regions of the implants, the 1-year horizontal bone alteration was -0.57 mm (0.004) and -0.19 mm (P = .059), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Buccal bone and alterations following implant placement may be visualized by CBCT in both extraction sockets and healed ridges. When the implant was appropriately displaced from the buccal wall of the socket, bone changes could be qualitatively evaluated by CBCT 1 year following placement.

Full-mouth rehabilitation of a patient with gastroesophageal reflux disease: a clinical report.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a chronic condition caused by stomach acid regurgitating into the esophagus or oral cavity, often causing heartburn. Tooth erosion and wear are common oral manifestations of GERD. This clinical report describes the full-mouth rehabilitation of a patient with over 30 years of GERD, causing wear of maxillary and mandibular anterior teeth, along with complications associated with past restorations. Full-mouth rehabilitation of natural teeth in conjunction with dental implants was selected as the treatment option. Ideal occlusal design and optimal esthetics, along with reinforcement of oral hygiene, ensure a favorable prognosis.

Comparison of radiographic and clinical outcomes following immediate provisionalization of single-tooth dental implants placed in healed alveolar ridges and extraction sockets.

PURPOSE: The primary goal of this study was to compare implant survival 12 months after immediate loading of single implants placed in healed ridges versus extraction sockets. Secondary outcomes were to compare marginal bone adaptation and soft tissue changes over time. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective multicenter clinical investigation was initiated to assess clinical performance of immediately loaded implants in the maxilla. Implant survival was ascertained at the time of impression making (8 to 10 weeks) and after 1 year by clinical stability. Radiographic marginal bone levels, soft tissue levels, and plaque and bleeding scores were compared with baseline values (implant placement and provisionalization). RESULTS: One hundred thirty-nine patients received 157 implants in the maxilla. Single implants with provisional crowns were placed in extraction sockets of 55 patients (58 implants) and in healed ridges of 60 patients (65 implants). In addition, 19 patients (23 implants) required bone grafting prior to implant placement, and 11 implants in 10 patients among all groups were not immediately loaded because of insufficient initial stability after surgery. Three implants (5.2%) failed in extraction sites and one implant (1.5%) failed in a healed ridge. The mean change in marginal bone level 1 year after implant placement was 1.30 mm (SD 2.52) (gain) in extraction sockets and -0.40 mm (SD 1.43) (loss) in healed ridges. The mucosal zenith was stable or moved incisally following definitive crown placement in 83.7% of immediate implants and 87.0% of implants placed in healed ridges. Plaque and inflammation scores were low and did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The responses of local bone and soft tissues at immediately loaded implants placed in extraction sockets or healed ridges were similar. Furthermore, these 1-year results suggest that clinical management of esthetically critical soft tissue may be predictably achieved in both indications.