RESUMO
Objective: This study's goal was to assess the failure rate and peri-implant complications of single-piece implant systems over the course of a one-year follow-up. Materials and Methods: Patient records were examined retrospectively. 150 single-piece dental implants were analyzed. Clinical results, implant features, and demographic information were gathered. Implant failure, which is characterized as the total loss of osseointegration, served as the key outcome indicator. Patient satisfaction and peri-implant problems were secondary outcomes. Data analysis employed descriptive statistics. Results: During the one-year follow-up period, the failure rate for single-piece implant systems was 6.7%. The two main factors leading to implant failure were found to be poor osseointegration (60%) and biomechanical overload (40%). 20% of the cases had peri-implant problems, such as peri-implantitis. 85% of the panelists felt that single-piece implants had satisfied their patients. Conclusion: A 6.7% failure rate in single-piece implant systems was seen in this one-year follow-up investigation. The major causes of implant failure were found to be poor osseointegration and biomechanical loading. In 20% of the cases, peri-implant problems such as peri-implantitis, were noted. There was great patient satisfaction. These results highlight the significance of regulating occlusal forces, optimizing osseointegration, and applying preventive measures to ensure the long-term viability of single-piece implant systems.
RESUMO
Objective: This study's objective was to assess and contrast the performance of several plating techniques in the treatment of zygomaticomaxillary complex (ZMC) fractures. Group A (Microplate System), Group B (Titanium Mesh System), and Group C (Absorbable Plate System) plating systems were the ones that were studied. Materials and Methods: With 10 patients in each group, a retrospective analysis of 30 patients with ZMC fractures was done. The following information was gathered: fracture reduction, stable fixation, complications, and patient satisfaction. Analysis was done on patient-reported outcomes, surgical outcomes, and demographic factors. Results: Group B (Titanium Mesh System) came in second with rates of 70% and 80%, respectively, while Group A (Microplate System) showed the highest rates of fracture reduction (90%) and stable fixation (100%). For fracture reduction and stable fixation, Group C (Absorbable Plate System) demonstrated rates of 80% and 90%, respectively. For Groups A, B, and C, the complication rates were 20%, 30%, and 10%, respectively. For Groups A, B, and C, the patient satisfaction levels were 90%, 80%, and 70%, respectively. Conclusion: According to the results, the Microplate System (Group A) is better than the Titanium Mesh System (Group B) and the Absorbable Plate System (Group C) in terms of fracture reduction and stable fixation when treating ZMC fractures. All plating systems had acceptable complication rates, and overall patient satisfaction ratings were high. Fracture features and patient-specific considerations should be taken into account while making individualized treatment options.
