No abstract

The present clinical study showed that a high implant survival rate and stable marginal bone conditions can be achieved after 1 year of loading in the maxilla following autogenous bone grafting whether or not PRP is used. RFA measurements revealed differences at abutment connection, which could be explained by the type of graft rather than as an effect of PRP. Although no obvious positive effects of PRP on bone graft healing could be demonstrated, the handling of the particulated bone grafts was improved.

No abstract

Abstract. A retrospective, multicenter, Scandinavian study of bone grafting of alveolar processes of severely atrophic jaws in combination with implant insertion was conducted with 150 patients. Five different grafting techniques were assessed: local or full onlay; inlay; combination of onlay/inlay grafts; and LeFort I osteotomies. The majority of the patients were treated using a one‐stage approach (n=125) and all had autogenous bone grafts. A total of 781 Brånemark implants were inserted, of which 624 were placed in bone grafts and alveolar bone. Twenty‐five patients (17%) dropped out during the follow‐up period of three years. Within the remaining patients, 77% of the inserted implants (n=516) were still in function at the end of the follow‐up period. A further ten implants were kept mucosa‐covered, resulting in an overall implant survival rate of around 80%. Onlays, inlays and LeFort I osteotomies showed almost the same success rates (76–84%), whereas the onlay/inlay technique gave rise to less favourable results (60%). Most of the observed losses (n=131) took place during healing and the first year of loading. More implants were lost when they were inserted simultaneously with the grafting (23%) than when they were placed in a second stage (10%). The latter technique was used mainly in combination with local onlay grafting (16/25). The failure percentage for implants inserted in non‐grafted bone (11%) was lower than for those inserted in bone grafts and alveolar bone (25%). The surviving implants of treated and followed patients served, in 88% of the cases (n=110), to support fixed bridges or overdentures, albeit, in some instances (n=23), after additional implant placement. In only 15 patients was it necessary to fall back on conventional removable prostheses or fixed partial bridges.

Since single-tooth implant restorations were introduced 12 years ago (Jemt 1986), there has been continuous development both in the technical design and the aesthetic outcome of the treatment. In order to ensure high quality in single-tooth implant treatments a clinical follow-up study was carried out on patients treated with modifications to the original regimen. In this study 69 consecutive patients were provided with 80 single-tooth implant restorations. The patients were followed for 3 years. There was continuous development of the prosthetic design during the time of the study, allowing us to analyse possible prognostic differences for the different prosthetic treatments. This study confirms earlier reports which describe the single-tooth implant treatment as a safe method with few surgical complications and minimal marginal bone loss. Only 1 implant was lost during the follow-up period and the average marginal bone loss was 0.48 mm over the 3-year follow-up period. Crowns veneered with acrylic and with gold casted directly to the abutments, screwed onto the implants, led to recurring prosthetic complications and gave an appearance of rapid ageing. The first generation of crowns made following the Cera-One design, sometimes produced a gap between the crown and the abutment associated with significant marginal bone loss during the first year. Few surgical or prosthetic complications were noted with cemented all-ceramic constructions, although the number of these crowns in this study was limited.