Search

Objective: The one-piece dental implant was originally designed to overcome the structural weaknesses of the two-piece implant. However, a fractured one-piece implant requires removal because the abutment cannot be repaired or replaced to support new prosthetic restorations. The aim of this study was to clarify the features and risk factors for fracture of the one-piece implant. Methods: This study was designed as a retrospective case series research. The subjects were patients who were treated for fractures of the one-piece implant at a clinic in Japan between 2012 and 2021. Fractures of the one-piece implant were diagnosed by cone-beam computed tomography, and the association between age and duration from implant placement to fracture was analyzed by one-way ANOVA followed by the Tukey test. Results: Eighteen patients and 20 one-piece implants (under 39 years: 5 patients and 6 implants; 40–59 years: 7 patients and 7 implants; over 60 years: 6 patients and 7 implants) had fractures in their one-piece implants. Of the fractured implants, 11 had a diameter of 3 mm, and 9 had a diameter of 4 mm. The mean durations up to implant fracture were 662 days in the younger group, 1467 days in the middle group, and 1239 days in older group, and the duration was significantly shorter in the younger group. In addition, 83.3% of fracture implants in the younger group were in the molar region. All fractures of the one-piece implants occurred under the bone margin. Two patients had torus mandibularis, and 1 patient was had bruxism. Conclusions: One-piece implants in younger patients that are located in the lower molar position are the most susceptible to implant fracture, and the fracture occurred under the bone margin in all cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study's main objective was to evaluate the bone density and osseointegration around dental implants with two different implant surfaces with early loading, using a micro-CT device. Twenty-four Fixo® implants (Oxyimplant, Biomec Italy) 3.5 × 8.5 mm with Laser (test group) and acid-etched surface (control group) were placed in six young beagle dog's mandibles. MicroCT (Albira, Germay) evaluation with seven regions of interest was defined in each implant on two different surfaces. A total of 168 sites were studied, and four isocountours were also done in each implant at coronal, transversal, and sagittal scanned areas to evaluate bone density location. The effect on the bone evaluation of two different surfaces variables was evaluated at the mesial and distal positions, showing crestal, medial, and apical types of bone density. Implant positions (P2, P3, P4, and M1) were also analyzed to determine bone density areas. The results of hard tissue density indicated a statistical significance for laser surface at crestal ROIs level (p < 0.001) and position of implants (p = 0.032) related to P3 areas compared to the acid-etched surface in Fixo® implants. Density D4 was the most common type of bone surrounding Fixo® standard implants at three different positions and density D3 was the most found on Fixo® laser surfaces. Micro-CT evaluation was a powerful tool for measuring the type of bone quality and location surrounding dental implants. Micro-CT study revealed that the most common density type found around Fixo® laser surface (test) implants was density D3 at the mesial and distal coronal part and density D4 at the middle and apical part. Fixo® implant with acid-etched surface showed the type of density D4 bone in hole implant at 3 months follow-up. It is a complementary histologic and histomorphometric analysis method for implant surrounding bone density.

The study's main objective was to evaluate the bone density and osseointegration around dental implants with two different implant surfaces with early loading, using a micro-CT device. Twenty-four Fixo® implants (Oxyimplant, Biomec Italy) 3.5 x 8.5 mm with Laser (test group) and acid-etched surface (control group) were placed in six young beagle dog's mandibles. MicroCT (Albira, Germay) evaluation with seven regions of interest was defined in each implant on two different surfaces. A total of 168 sites were studied, and four isocountours were also done in each implant at coronal, transversal, and sagittal scanned areas to evaluate bone density location. The effect on the bone evaluation of two different surfaces variables was evaluated at the mesial and distal positions, showing crestal, medial, and apical types of bone density. Implant positions (P2, P3, P4, and M1) were also analyzed to determine bone density areas. The results of hard tissue density indicated a statistical significance for laser surface at crestal ROIs level (p < 0.001) and position of implants (p = 0.032) related to P3 areas compared to the acid-etched surface in Fixo® implants. Density D4 was the most common type of bone surrounding Fixo® standard implants at three different positions and density D3 was the most found on Fixo® laser surfaces. Micro-CT evaluation was a powerful tool for measuring the type of bone quality and location surrounding dental implants. Micro-CT study revealed that the most common density type found around Fixo® laser surface (test) implants was density D3 at the mesial and distal coronal part and density D4 at the middle and apical part. Fixo® implant with acidetched surface showed the type of density D4 bone in hole implant at 3 months follow-up. It is a complementary histologic and histomorphometric analysis method for implant surrounding bone density. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Implantologie is the property of Quintessenz Verlags GmbH and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Implant rehabilitation is a daily practice in dentistry, and patients often have heightened expectations regarding both the functional and the aesthetic outcome. Implant–abutment connection (IAC) is involved in the long-term aesthetic quality of the rehabilitation. The use of one-piece implants for fixing dentures may prevent the mechanical and biological implication of the implant–abutment interface, resulting in a better quality of hard and soft tissue maintenance. In this case report, we present a novel one-piece implant in a maxillary rehabilitation with a full model-free digital approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: One-piece dental implants are commonly used for the immediate restoration of missing teeth. In most cases, the clinician has to prepare the abutment intraorally to ensure a proper emergence profile and abutment angulation. However, this procedure might impair primary stability and thus potentially compromise osseointegration. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of abutment preparation on the primary stability of a one-piece implant system (UNO MIS). Materials and Methods: Implant stability was assessed by resonance frequency analysis with a novel custom-made external fixation device, validated previously, developed specifically for resonance frequency measurements of this implant. Thirty 3 × 13-mm implants were inserted in porcine jawbone with insertion torque of 15 Ncm (group A, 15 implants) or 30 Ncm (group B, 15 implants). Abutments were prepared by reducing the facial aspect of the implant abutment with a high-speed dental turbine (400,000 rpm) equipped with a medium-roughness diamond bur. Implant stability quotients (ISQs) were measured before and after abutment preparation. Results: Mean ISQs measured in group A and group B before abutment preparation were very similar (58.2 ± 1.4 and 57.4 ± 0.9, respectively; P > .05). Following abutment preparation, three implants in group A lost primary stability. The mean ISQ value in group A was reduced from 58.2 ± 1.4 to 54.9 ± 7.9 following abutment preparation (P < .05). The mean ISQ in group B was not affected by abutment preparation (57.4 ± 0.9 versus 57.3 ± 1.0; P > .05). Conclusions: Abutment preparation of a one-piece dental implant inserted with low insertion torque might impair implant primary stability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Immediate loading and/or restoration of dental implants requires the assessment of implant stability, which is best performed by resonance frequency analysis (RFA) prior to loading. One-piece dental implants are usually used for immediate loading, but there is currently no available reliable method to assess the primary stability of one-piece dental implants. Therefore, this study sought to validate a novel device designed for RFA measurements of one-piece implants. Material and Methods: Thirty (3.75 × 13 mm) internal-hex implants (Seven, MIS) were divided into two groups; 15 were placed in an acrylic glass block and 15 were placed in fresh porcine jawbone using 30 N/cm2 of insertion torque. Implant stability quotient (ISQ) values were measured using the Osstell Mentor device; then, a new external fixation device was attached to the implant abutment with a 10-mm arm extending from the implant to an internal-hex ring at its proximal end. ISQ values were measured at the implant's internal hex and at the internal hex of the device, and the damping ratio was calculated. The measurements were repeated with 15 (3 × 13 mm) one-piece implants (UNO, MIS) attached to the same device. Results: The damping ratio between the implant and the proximal device was 23.6% ± 4% in acrylic glass (50.1 ± 1.7 ISQ and 38.2 ± 1.8 ISQ, respectively) and 23.1% ± 3% in porcine bone (74.9 ± 2.8 ISQ and 57.5 ± 0.5 ISQ, respectively). ISQ values determined by the device on one-piece and two-piece implants were similar (57.4 ± 0.9 and 57.5 ± 0.5, respectively). Conclusion: With the present validation of this external fixation device for the measurements of implant stability using RFA, it is now possible to measure primary stability of any one-piece implant system, obviating the need for custom-made Osstell adaptors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Española de Cirugía Oral y Maxilofacial is the property of Sociedad Espanola de Cirugia Oral y Maxilofacial (SECOM) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Objectives: The aim of the present multi-center study was to evaluate the treatment outcome of immediately restored one-piece single-tooth implants with a diameter of 3 mm after 1 year. Material and methods: A total of 57 one-piece implants (NobelDirect® 3.0) were inserted in 47 patients (26 females, 21 males) with a mean age of 31 years (range: 17-76 years) at five different centers. The implants replaced maxillary lateral incisors and mandibular incisors. The implants were placed either in conjunction with tooth extraction or in healed sites, and all implants were immediately restored with a provisional resin crown. If needed, the abutment part of the implant was prepared before crown cementation. The permanent crown was placed after 1.9-14.5 months. Radiographs were taken at implant insertion as well as after 6 and 12 months to evaluate the peri-implant marginal bone level and bone loss. Moreover, plaque, bleeding on probing and complications were assessed. Results: A total of 44 patients (23 females, 21 males) with 54 implants were available for the 1-year follow-up. One implant was lost, thus the 1-year implant survival was 98%. A statistically significant mean marginal bone loss was observed between baseline and 6 months (1.1 mm, range: −0.7 to 4.4 mm; n=49) and between baseline and 12 months (1.6 mm, range: −0.8 to 4.6 mm; n=50). A total of 18% of the implants were characterized by a bone loss of more than 3 mm. No bleeding on probing was observed around 83% of the implants. Plaque was registered at 15% of the implants. The most common complications were related to the provisional crown, i.e. fracture ( n=3) and loss of retention ( n=3). Conclusions: A high 1-year implant survival was observed in the present study. However, the excessive peri-implant marginal bone loss around several implants indicates that this implant should be used with caution until further studies have been conducted. To cite this article: Zembić A, Johannesen LH, Schou S, Malo P, Reichert T, Farella M, Hämmerle CHF. Immediately restored one-piece single-tooth implants with reduced diameter: one-year results of a multi-center study. Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 23, 2012; 49-54. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02174.x [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The field of implant dentistry continues to grow globally as clinicians embrace the evolution of various endosseous implant technologies and the array of enhanced surgical and prosthetic products. The utilization of small diameter implants in limited osseous regions increases patients' ability to choose implants as a viable restorative option. Although small diameter implants have been indicated in the incisor region for the maxilla and mandible primarily, their usage should be considered in select posterior regions. These 2 case reports demonstrate the incorporation of small diameter implants to replace missing mandibular posterior teeth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the Nobel Direct® and Nobel Perfect® one-piece implants (OPIs) when used for immediate function. Material and methods: Forty-eight patients were provided with 115 OPIs for loading with a provisional crown or a bridge within 24 h and followed for at least 12 months with clinical and radiographic examinations. A group of 97 patients previously treated under identical conditions by the same team with 380 two-piece implants (TPIs) for immediate loading in the mandible and maxilla served as the reference group. Results: Six (5.2%) OPIs failed during the follow-up due to extensive bone loss. Five (1.3%) implants failed in the reference group. After 1 year, the mean marginal bone loss was 2.1 mm (SD 1.3) for OPIs and 0.8 mm (SD 1) for TPIs. 20% of OPIs showed more than 3 mm of bone loss compared with 0.6% for TPIs. When compensating for vertical placement depth, OPIs still showed a lower marginal bone level and thus more exposed threads than TPIs. Depending on the criteria used, the success rate for OPIs was 46.1% or 72.2% compared with 85% or 91.6% for TPIs. Conclusions: The Nobel Direct® and Nobel Perfect® OPIs show lower success rates and more bone resorption than TPIs after 1 year in function. Factors such as implant design, insertion depth, rough surface towards the mucosa, in situ preparation and immediate loading may have an influence on the clinical outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Interest in the use of one-stage surgery and immediate loading of oral implants has lately been increasing. Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the 3-year results of one-stage surgery versus two-stage surgery, early loading versus loading after a 3-month healing period, and the use of one-piece implants versus the use of two-piece implants. Materials and Methods: The study included 108 patients with edentulous mandibles. Each patient was treated with four Brånemark System® implants (Nobel Biocare AB, Göteborg, Sweden) and with full fixed prostheses. Patients were consecutively treated and were distributed in four groups: group A (one-stage surgery), group B (control group with two-stage surgery), group C (one-piece implants), and group D (early loading). In groups A and B Brånemark Standard implants and standard abutments were used. In group C the conical one-piece Brånemark implant was used, and in group D the patients had Brånemark System Mk III implants together with multiunit abutments. All patients were observed for 3 years. Results: Of the 432 inserted implants, 24 were lost. Survival rates in the three experimental groups ranged from 93.2 to 93.3% whereas the survival rate in group B (the control group with two-stage surgery) was 97.5%. The differences between the groups were not statistically significant. The changes in marginal bone level were measured from fixture insertion to the final follow-up at 3 years. The bone loss in group D (early loading) was significantly less than in group B (the control group) whereas there were no differences in marginal bone change between the other groups. Conclusions: Early loading seemed to give good results in the anterior part of the mandible. The survival rate of the early-loaded implants did not significantly differ from that of implants inserted with the conventional two-stage procedure, but the mean marginal bone loss around the surviving implants was less with early loading. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Most implant treatment is performed with a two-stage surgical procedure. A disadvantage of these implant treatments is that they are time-consuming. Purpose: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the results of early loading in the edentulous mandible and to compare those results with treatment results of one-stage surgery followed by a healing period and with two-stage surgery. Material and Methods: The material comprises four treatment groups with a total of 108 patients with edentulous lower jaws and 432 implants. All patients were treated with Brånemark implants (Nobel Biocare AB, Gothenburg, Sweden) with a turned surface and fixed prostheses in the lower jaw, supported by four implants. The patients in group A were treated with a one-stage procedure, a two-piece implant, and a 3-month healing period before loading. Group B (control group) had a two-stage procedure, a two-piece implant, and a 3-month healing period. Group C had a one-stage procedure, a one-piece implant, and a 3-month healing period. Group D was treated with a one-stage surgical procedure, a two-piece implant, and early loading (within 3 weeks). All patients were provided with a Procera R Implant Bridge (Nobel Biocare) with a framework made by computer-assisted milling of one piece of pure titanium. All patients have been followed up for 1 year. Results: The survival rates were 93.2 to 93.3% in the experimental groups and 97.5% in the control group. The difference was not statistically significant. The measurements of the marginal bone level demonstrated a mean bone loss of 0.8 mm between fixture insertion and the 1-year examination in patients with early loading (group D) whereas the bone loss in patients who underwent a healing period before loading was 1.3 to 1.6 mm. The difference between the control group and the group with early loading was significant. Conclusions: Survival rates for patients treated with a one-stage procedure were lower than survival rates f... [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]