Search

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.)

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.)

Copyright of Quintessenz der Zahntechnik 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.)

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.)

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.)

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.)

Augmentation of alveolar ridge defects is technique-sensitive procedure in dental implantology. Depending on the size of the defect, it may be necessary to use autogenous bone blocks. However, patients may be against these blocks as these procedures are surgically invasive. Case report: This report describes the restoration of a partially edentulous mandible, which suffered a major bone defect from the right canine to the third molar site after multiple implant losses. The use of a CAD/CAM allogeneic cancellous bone block from a living donor bone was planned for the reconstruction of the alveolar ridge at the defected site. A CBCT scan was taken and the virtual planning of the bone augmentation and placement of four implants was performed. The milled bone block was fixed for augmentation and the implants were placed using a CBCT-generated surgical guide. After osseointegration, a CAD/CAM-fabricated screw-retained metal-ceramic implant fixed partial denture with angulated screw channels was delivered. Results: The use of CAD/CAM-milled, allogeneic bone block resulted in a time-efficient and simplified reconstruction of the defect because no donor site was used, and the fit of the block on the native bone was uneventful and fast. At the 1-year follow-up, an average peri-implant vertical soft tissue decrease of 1 mm on buccal and 0.3mm on lingual sites was observed and the peri-implant tissues were healthy. Conclusions: The long-term success of this CAD/CAM cancellous bone block needs to be evaluated in well-designed clinical studies. [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.)

Purpose: To evaluate the outcome of a clinical study on telescopic-crown--retained removable dental prostheses (TCR-RDPs) on implants or implants and teeth after 8 to 12 years. Materials and Methods: Between 1999 and 2002, 39 (41 arches) patients received implant- or combined tooth-implant--supported TCR-RDPs in the maxilla and/or mandible. One-stage surgery was performed, and after a conventional healing period, TCR-RDPs were inserted. Thirty-one patients (33 prostheses) were available for annual follow-up investigations with a standardized protocol from 2010 until 2013. Cumulative survival and success of the abutments were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and a Cox regression model was used to identify potential predictors for abutment complications. Patients' oral health--related quality of life (OHRQoL) was measured by means of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP). Results: After a mean observation period of 11.3 ± 1.1 years, all restorations were still functioning successfully. Two implants and 10 abutment teeth were lost, leading to significantly different implant and tooth survival rates of 97.6% (SE ± 1.7%) and 81.8% (SE 5.3%; P = .007). Implants placed in the mandible and those in the group with a higher number of abutments (five to six vs two to four) showed higher success rates. The success rates of abutment teeth were not influenced by location (mandible vs maxilla) or number of abutments (five to six vs two to four). Conclusion: Implant- or combined tooth-implant--supported TCR-RDPs provided a satisfying treatment option for patients with severely reduced dentition in the long term. Due to the small sample size, the results presented should be interpreted with caution. [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.)