Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mouth opening limitation and influence of age and surgical location for static fully guided dental implant placement: an observational, cross-sectional clinical study.
Gargallo-Albiol, J; Ortega-Martínez, J; Salomó-Coll, O; López-Boado, A P; Paternostro-Betancourt, D; Hernández-Alfaro, F.
Afiliação
  • Gargallo-Albiol J; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Sant Cugat del Vallès, Barcelona, Spain; Department of Periodontics and Oral Medicine, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
  • Ortega-Martínez J; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Sant Cugat del Vallès, Barcelona, Spain. Electronic address: jortega@uic.es.
  • Salomó-Coll O; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Sant Cugat del Vallès, Barcelona, Spain.
  • López-Boado AP; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Sant Cugat del Vallès, Barcelona, Spain.
  • Paternostro-Betancourt D; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Sant Cugat del Vallès, Barcelona, Spain.
  • Hernández-Alfaro F; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Sant Cugat del Vallès, Barcelona, Spain; Institute of Maxillofacial Surgery, Teknon Medical Center, Barcelona, Spain.
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg ; 53(6): 526-532, 2024 Jun.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38302300
ABSTRACT
The influence of age and region of the mouth was assessed in regard to mouth opening in fully guided implant placement. Ninety patients were included in this study, 30 in each of three age groups (20-34, 35-55, and >55 years). Maximum passive mouth opening was recorded in three locations incisal, canine, and molar. The minimum distance required to allow the bone drilling sequence through a static fully guided approach was analysed for four implant systems Straumann, MIS Dentsply, Astra Tech Dentsply, and Dentium. The mean ± standard deviation maximum mouth opening (all 90 patients) was 46.34 ± 7.70 mm, 36.82 ± 5.92 mm, and 30.99 ± 5.40 mm in the incisal, premolar, and molar region, respectively. No significant difference in mouth opening at any of the three locations was found between the age groups (all P > 0.05). However, a correlation was found between increasing age and decreasing average mouth opening in all three mouth regions; each additional 1 year resulted in a mean reduction of 0.13 mm, 0.09 mm, and 0.08 mm in the incisal, premolar, and molar region, respectively. The minimum required mouth opening was most likely to be met for implant placement in the incisal region (98.9% of all patients) and least likely to be met for placement in the molar region, particularly for older patients (as low as 30% of patients). Mouth opening remains a major limitation in fully guided implant surgery, especially in posterior areas and in older patients. The use of some implant systems in the posterior area may be limited to only one in three patients.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Implantação Dentária Endóssea Tipo de estudo: Prevalence_studies Limite: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Implantação Dentária Endóssea Tipo de estudo: Prevalence_studies Limite: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article