-
Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related... Aug 2023Peri-implant mucosal integration is becoming a critical aspect for long term implant health and can be triggered the selection of implant components. The aim of this... (Review)
Review
Peri-implant mucosal integration is becoming a critical aspect for long term implant health and can be triggered the selection of implant components. The aim of this review is therefore to investigate the evidence concerning implant connection and abutment characteristics (abutment materials, design, handling) as predisposing or precipitating factor for peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. Although the evidence that these features can directly predispose/precipitate peri-implant diseases is limited, there are -few- studies showing a potential role of the implant connection, trans-mucosal configuration, and handling in the development of early bone loss and/or peri-implantitis. With bone level implants, conical internal connections (with inherent platform switching) might be preferred over internal flat-flat and external connections to decrease the risk of early bone loss and potentially the risk of peri-implant disease. Moreover, there is a trend suggesting moving the prosthetic interface coronally (to the juxta-mucosal level) as soon as possible to reduce the number of disconnections and to limit the risk of cements remnants. This can be achieved by choosing a tissue-level implant or to place a trans-mucosal abutment (one abutment-one time approach) to optimize the peri-implant soft tissue seal. In absence of evidence for the biocompatibility regarding several restorative materials, biocompatible materials such as titanium or zirconia should be preferred in the trans-mucosal portion. Finally, higher implants (≥2mm) with an emergence angle below 30° seem more favourable. It should however be noted that some of this information is solely based on indirect information (such as early bone loss) and more research is needed before making firm recommendations about abutment choice. [Correction added on 13 March 2023, after first online publication: 'longer implants (≥2mm)' was changed to 'higher implants (≥2mm)' in this version.].
Topics: Humans; Peri-Implantitis; Dental Implants; Dental Implant-Abutment Design; Precipitating Factors; Dental Abutments
PubMed: 36825512
DOI: 10.1111/cid.13185 -
International Journal of Implant... Jul 2023The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the evidence regarding the indications for placement of zygomatic implants to rehabilitate edentulous maxillae. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the evidence regarding the indications for placement of zygomatic implants to rehabilitate edentulous maxillae.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A focused question using the PIO format was developed, questioning "in patients in need of an implant-supported rehabilitation of the edentulous maxillae, what are the indications for the use of zygomatic implants''. The primary information analyzed and collected was a clear description of the indication for the use of zygomatic implants.
RESULTS
A total of 1266 records were identified through database searching. The full-text review was conducted for 117 papers, and 10 were selected to be included in this review. Zygomatic implant indications were extreme bone atrophy or deficiency secondary to different factors. The quad zygoma concept (two zygomatic implants bilaterally placed and splinted) was applied to 107 patients, the classic zygoma concept (one zygomatic implant bilaterally placed and splinted to standard anterior implants) was used in 88 patients, and the unilateral concept (one zygomatic implant on one side, splinted with one or more conventional implants) was employed in 14 patients.
CONCLUSIONS
The main indication for the use of zygomatic implants was considered extreme maxillary bone atrophy, resulting from many factors. The clear definition of what was considered "extreme bone atrophy" is not uniquely defined in each paper. Further studies are needed to develop clear indications for zygomatic implants.
Topics: Humans; Dental Implants; Atrophy; Databases, Factual; Medicine; Mouth, Edentulous
PubMed: 37391575
DOI: 10.1186/s40729-023-00480-4 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Sep 2023High-level evidence concerning the restoration of endodontically treated posterior teeth by means of direct composite resin or indirect restorations is lacking. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
High-level evidence concerning the restoration of endodontically treated posterior teeth by means of direct composite resin or indirect restorations is lacking.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyze the current literature on the direct and indirect restoration of endodontically treated posterior teeth.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Databases MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and EMBASE were screened. Risk of bias was assessed by using the ROB2 tool for RCTs and the ROBINS-I tool for prospective and retrospective clinical studies. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and prospective and retrospective studies comparing direct composite resin and indirect restorations on endodontically treated posterior teeth were included. Outcomes were tooth and restoration survival. A meta-analysis was conducted for tooth retention and restorative success.
RESULTS
Twenty-two studies were included (2 RCTs, 3 prospective, and 17 retrospective). Over the short term (2.5 to 3 years), low-quality evidence suggested no difference in tooth survival. For the prospective and retrospective clinical trials, the overall risk of bias was serious to critical from the risk of confounding because of a difference in restorative indication: Direct restorations were fabricated when one marginal ridge remained or when tooth prognosis was unfavorable. For short-term restorative success, low-quality evidence suggested no difference between the direct and indirect restorations.
CONCLUSIONS
For the short term (2.5 to 3 years), low-quality evidence suggests no difference in tooth survival or restoration quality. To assess the influence of the type of restoration on the survival and restorative success of endodontically treated posterior teeth, clinical trials that control for the amount of coronal tooth tissue and other baseline characteristics are needed.
Topics: Humans; Composite Resins; Dental Restoration, Permanent; Molar; Retrospective Studies; Dental Restoration Failure; Tooth, Nonvital
PubMed: 34980474
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.11.009 -
International Journal of Implant... Jul 2023The macrogeometry of a dental implant plays a decisive role in its primary stability. A larger diameter, a conical shape, and a roughened surface increase the contact... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The macrogeometry of a dental implant plays a decisive role in its primary stability. A larger diameter, a conical shape, and a roughened surface increase the contact area of the implant with the surrounding bone and thus improve primary stability. This is considered the basis for successful implant osseointegration that different factors, such as implant design, can influence. This narrative review aims to critically review macro-geometric features affecting the primary stability of dental implants.
METHODS
For this review, a comprehensive literature search and review of relevant studies was conducted based on formulating a research question, searching the literature using keywords and electronic databases such as PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library to search for relevant studies. These studies were screened and selected, the study quality was assessed, data were extracted, the results were summarized, and conclusions were drawn.
RESULTS
The macrogeometry of a dental implant includes its surface characteristics, size, and shape, all of which play a critical role in its primary stability. At the time of placement, the initial stability of an implant is determined by its contact area with the surrounding bone. Larger diameter and a conical shape of an implant result in a larger contact area and better primary stability. But the linear relationship between implant length and primary stability ends at 12 mm.
CONCLUSIONS
Several factors must be considered when choosing the ideal implant geometry, including local factors such as the condition of the bone and soft tissues at the implant site and systemic and patient-specific factors such as osteoporosis, diabetes, or autoimmune diseases. These factors can affect the success of the implant procedure and the long-term stability of an implant. By considering these factors, the surgeon can ensure the greatest possible therapeutic success and minimize the risk of implant failure.
Topics: Humans; Dental Implants; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Osseointegration; Dental Prosthesis Design; Surgeons
PubMed: 37405709
DOI: 10.1186/s40729-023-00485-z -
La Tunisie Medicale Dec 2023A relatively common oral health problem, gag reflex is a clinical challenge during dentures fabrication. In the current literature several techniques have been described...
A relatively common oral health problem, gag reflex is a clinical challenge during dentures fabrication. In the current literature several techniques have been described regarding this clinical condition. The latter use either psychological, pharmacological and prosthetic therapies to treat these patients. The purpose of this case report is to highlight an original prosthetic strategy which consists on a progressive lengthening of the maxillary complete prosthesis allowing a patient with acute gag reflex to adapt to the denture palatal extension.
Topics: Humans; Denture, Complete, Upper; Denture Design; Denture Retention; Reflex
PubMed: 38477203
DOI: No ID Found -
International Dental Journal Feb 2024
Topics: Humans; Peri-Implantitis; Dental Implants
PubMed: 37891059
DOI: 10.1016/j.identj.2023.09.001 -
Clinical Oral Implants Research Sep 2023For the present review, the following focused question was addressed: In patients with root-analog dental implants, what is the effect of implants made of other... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
For the present review, the following focused question was addressed: In patients with root-analog dental implants, what is the effect of implants made of other materials than titanium (alloy) on implant survival, marginal bone loss (MBL), and technical and biological complications after at least 5 years.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An electronic (Medline, Embase, Web of Science) search was performed to identify observational clinical studies published from January 2000 investigating a minimum of 20 commercially available zirconia implants with a mean follow-up of at least 60 months. Primary outcome was implant survival, secondary outcomes included peri-implant MBL, probing depths (PDs), and technical and biological complications. Meta-analyses were performed to evaluate implant survival, MBL, and PD.
RESULTS
From 5129 titles, 580 abstracts were selected, and 111 full-text articles were screened. Finally, 4 prospective and 2 retrospective observational clinical cohort studies were included for data extraction. Meta-analyses estimated after 5 years of loading mean values of 97.2% (95% CI 94.7-99.1) for survival (277 implants, 221 patients), 1.1 mm (95% CI: 0.9-1.3) for MBL (229 implants, 173 patients), and 3.0 mm (95% CI 2.5-3.4) for PDs (231 implants, 175 patients).
CONCLUSIONS
After 5 years, commercially available zirconia implants showed reliable clinical performance based on survival rates, MBL, and PD values. However, more well-designed prospective clinical studies and randomized clinical trials investigating titanium and zirconia implants are needed to confirm the presently evaluated promising outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Dental Implants; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Titanium; Bone Diseases, Metabolic
PubMed: 37750521
DOI: 10.1111/clr.14133 -
Periodontology 2000 Oct 2023Rehabilitation of the edentulous maxilla with implant-supported fixed dental prostheses can represent a significant clinical challenge due to limited bone availability... (Review)
Review
Rehabilitation of the edentulous maxilla with implant-supported fixed dental prostheses can represent a significant clinical challenge due to limited bone availability and surgical access, among other factors. This review addresses several treatment options to replace missing teeth in posterior maxillary segments, namely the placement of standard implants in conjunction with maxillary sinus floor augmentation, short implants, tilted implants, and distal cantilever extensions. Pertinent technical information and a concise summary of relevant evidence on the reported outcomes of these different therapeutic approaches are presented, along with a set of clinical guidelines to facilitate decision-making processes and optimize the outcomes of therapy.
Topics: Humans; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Sinus Floor Augmentation; Maxilla; Dental Prosthesis Design; Mouth, Edentulous; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Jaw, Edentulous; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37486029
DOI: 10.1111/prd.12507 -
Clinical Oral Implants Research Sep 2023The aim of Working Group 3 was to address the influence of both material- and anti-resorptive drug- related factors on clinical and biological outcomes and complications... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
The aim of Working Group 3 was to address the influence of both material- and anti-resorptive drug- related factors on clinical and biological outcomes and complications in implant dentistry. Focused questions were addressed on (a) implant materials other than titanium (alloy)s, (b) transmucosal abutment materials and (c) medications affecting bone metabolism were addressed.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Three systematic reviews formed the basis for discussion in Group 3. Consensus statements and clinical recommendations were formulated by group consensus based on the findings of the systematic reviews. Patient perspectives and recommendations for future research were also conveyed. These were then presented and accepted following further discussion and modifications as required by the plenary.
RESULTS
Zirconia is a valid alternative to titanium as material for implant and transmucosal components, allowing soft and hard tissue integration with clinical outcomes-identified by implant survival, marginal bone loss and peri-implant probing depths-up to 5-years comparable to titatnium. However, most of the evidence for zirconia implants is based on 1-piece implants limiting the indication range. Furthermore, based on expert opinion, zirconia transmucosal components might be preferred in the esthetic zone. In patients receiving low-dose bisphosphonate therapy, the rate of early implant failure is not increased, while the long-term effects remain poorly studied. Although it has not been sufficiently addressed, similar outcomes can be expected with low-dose denosumab. A drug holiday is not recommended when considering implant placement in patients treated with low-dose ARD. However, the specific therapeutic window, the cumulative dose and the administration time should be considered. Access to peri-implant supportive care is mandatory to prevent peri-implantitis-related medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) or implant-related sequestra (IRS). In patients receiving low-dose anti-resorptive drugs (ARD) therapy, the risk of complications related to implant placement is high, and implant procedures in this specific population should be strictly treated in a comprehensive multidisciplinary center. Finally, healthy dental implants should not be removed before low or high-dose ARD.
CONCLUSIONS
Zirconia implants can be an alternative to titanium implants in selected indications. However, the current state of evidence remains limited, especially for 2-piece implant designs. Administration of low-dose ARD did not show any negative impact on early implant outcomes, but careful follow-up and supportive care is recommended in order to prevent peri-implant MRONJ and IRS. Implant placement in high-dose patients must be strictly considered in a comprehensive multidisciplinary center.
Topics: Humans; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Titanium; Dental Implants; Alloys
PubMed: 37750518
DOI: 10.1111/clr.14135 -
Dental Materials : Official Publication... Sep 2023Trans-mucosal platforms connecting the bone-anchored implants to the prosthetic teeth are essential for the success of oral rehabilitation in implant dentistry. This... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
Trans-mucosal platforms connecting the bone-anchored implants to the prosthetic teeth are essential for the success of oral rehabilitation in implant dentistry. This region promotes a challenging environment for the successfulness of dental components due to the transitional characteristics between soft and hard tissues, the presence of bacteria, and mechanical forces. This review explored the most current approaches to modify trans-mucosal components in terms of macro-design and surface properties.
METHODS
This critical review article revised intensely the literature until July 2023 to demonstrate, discuss, and summarize the current knowledge about marketable and innovative trans-mucosal components for dental implants.
RESULTS
A large number of dental implant brands have promoted the development of several implant-abutment designs in the clinical market. The progress of abutment designs shows an optimistic reduction of bacteria colonization underlying the implant-abutment gap, although, not completely inhibited. Fundamental and preclinical studies have demonstrated promising outcomes for altered-surface properties targeting antibacterial properties and soft tissue sealing. Nanotopographies, biomimetic coatings, and antibiotic-release properties have been shown to be able to modulate, align, orient soft tissue cells, and induce a reduction in biofilm formation, suggesting superior abilities compared to the current trans-mucosal platforms available on the market.
SIGNIFICANCE
Future clinical implant-abutments show the possibility to reduce peri-implant diseases and fortify soft tissue interaction with the implant-substrate, defending the implant system from bacteria invasion. However, the absence of technologies translated to commercial stages reveals the need for findings to "bridge the gap" between scientific evidences published and applied science in the industry.
Topics: Humans; Dental Implants; Peri-Implantitis; Tooth; Dental Abutments; Dental Implant-Abutment Design
PubMed: 37537095
DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2023.07.009