Home Subscription Services
 
   

 
Quintessence International
QI Home Page
About the Editor
Editorial Board
Accepted Manuscripts
Submit
Author Guidelines
Submission Form
Reprints / Articles
Permissions
Advertising
MEDLINE Search
 
 
 
 
 
FacebookTwitter
Quintessence Publishing: Journals: QI
Quintessence International

Edited by Eli Eliav

ISSN 0033-6572 (print) • ISSN 1936-7163 (online)

Publication:
April 2012
Volume 43 , Issue 4

Back
Share Abstract:

Placement of Brånemark Mk IV implants in compromised and grafted bone: Radiographic outcome of 61 sites in 27 patients with 3- to 7-year follow-ups

Oded Bahat, BDS, MSD, FACD/Richard M. Sullivan, DDS/Ami Smidt, DMD, MSc, BmedSc

Pages: 292-303
PMID: 22532943

Objective: Sites in which bone is reduced in quality or height create challenges in esthetic reconstruction and loading support, which leads to a higher risk of failure. The Mk IV system with a TiUnite surface was designed specifically for placement in soft bone. This paper describes postloading outcomes of 103 Mk IV implants, with a focus on bone preservation in compromised bone sites during early remodeling, stability after abutment connection, and a 3- to 7-year follow-up from implant placement. Method and Materials: A series of 103 4-mm (diameter), ≥ 10-mm (length) Mk IV implants were placed in the maxillae of 25 females and 14 males. Twenty-three patients also received staged bone grafts, and two underwent socket augmentation as well as grafts. Areas of previous infection were prepared mechanically and chemically. To ensure primary implant stability, the size of the osteotomy and the number of entries were minimized. Following a delayed loading protocol, all patients were restored with fixed partial dentures. For analysis of bone stability, the marginal levels on the mesial and distal aspects of the implants were measured at 7× magnification by a radiologist not involved in the treatment. Results: Three implants were lost, 1 implant was never loaded although it integrated, 14 implants were not available for follow-up after abutment correction, and 5 had poor-quality radiographs. The mean marginal bone loss between implant insertion and loading was 1.21 ± 0.86 mm (n = 80). The differences in bone-remodeling levels in grafted and nongrafted sites were not significant. Data are reported on 103 implants in 39 consecutive patients through abutment connection, with radiographic follow-up from 3 to 7 years postimplant placement on 27 patients. Conclusion: It is critical to ensure optimal three-dimensional orientation and minimize site preparation, particularly when placing implants in compromised bone. With bone of poor preoperative density using a customized site preparation technique, excellent short-term implant survival and long-term bone stability have been demonstrated. Further follow-up will determine whether the Mk IV implant is the optimal design for compromised bone, including associated soft tissue stability. (Quintessence Int 2012;43:293–303)

Key words: bone augmentation, bone loss, compromised, dental implants, follow-up studies, surface

Full Text PDF File | Order Article

 

Get Adobe Reader
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF files. This is a free program available from the Adobe web site.
Follow the download directions on the Adobe web site to get your copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.
  © 2014 Quintessence Publishing Co Inc
 

Home | Subscription Services | Books | Journals | Multimedia | Events | Blog
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | About Us | Contact Us | Advertising | Help | Sitemap | Catalog