A retrospective study on ultra‐wide diameter dental implants for immediate molar replacement

Abstract

Background Although immediate implant placement for single rooted teeth is well documented, the prognosis of ultra‐wide implants in molar sockets lacks data. Purpose To evaluate the outcome of ultra‐wide implants, immediately placed in molar sockets. Materials and Methods Patients treated with immediate ultra‐wide diameter implants that have been in function for at least 40 months, were invited for a clinical evaluation. A radiograph was taken to measure marginal bone loss. Probing depths as well as plaque and bleeding scores were recorded at the implant and contralateral tooth. Crown and soft tissue dimensions were measured, and patients filled out an OHIP‐14 questionnaire. Results Eighty‐five out of 230 patients (37%) were evaluated. Twenty‐eight implants received a bone graft to fill the residual space. Average bone loss was 0.19 mm after a mean follow‐up of 67 months, with no significant changes over time (P = 0.170). There was no significant difference in bone loss between the maxilla and mandible (P = 0.797), male or female (P = 0.128), smoking and nonsmoking (P = 0.219), grafted and nongrafted sites (P = 0.098), or the different bio‐types (P = 0.404). The distal papillae were significantly higher if a contact point was present (P = 0.002). Plaque was more frequent at the contralateral tooth (P < 0.001), but more bleeding on probing was observed around the implants (P = 0.021). Overall, 63.5% of the patients experienced no problems at all. Conclusion Ultra‐wide diameter implants for immediate molar replacement demonstrate little bone loss and stable soft tissue conditions over a 4 to 7‐year period.

Three-dimensional alveolar bone assessment of mandibular molars for immediate implant placement: a virtual implant placement study

“…However, enough primary stability in molar post-extraction sites is often difficult to achieve. Ultra-wide or wide diameter implant increases the engagement and contact area with the inter-radicular septum and socket walls, and therefore, is frequently used in post-extraction molar sites to overcome the lack of primary stability [ 5 , 16 – 18 ]. Nonetheless, the long-term prognosis of an ultra-wide diameter implant remains controversial.…”

“…Immediate implant placement in molar extraction sites has been reported to be a valid treatment approach with high survival and success rates [ 2 – 4 ]. It has given several clinical benefits, such as reduced surgical procedure, ideal implant positioning, and higher patient satisfaction [ 4 , 5 ].…”

Survival Rate of Ultrawide Diameter Implants Placed into Molar Postextraction Sockets and in Function for Up to 144 Months

“…More specific inclusion criteria would be beneficial for restorative follow‐up. The clinical protocol used in this clinical series correlated well with the guidelines that Hattingh et al 21–25 made regarding ultrawide diameter implant placement.…”

The Effect of Periodontal and Peri-Implanter Health on IL-1β and TNF-α Levels in Gingival Crevicular and Peri-Implanter Sulcus Fluid: a Cross-Sectional Study

“…This posed a significant challenge in our study as it is not possible to match diseased areas with different disease categories, but to overcome this limitation, so to maximize host tissue standardization as much as possible, samples were taken from the same individual's teeth or implants belonging to the same disease group (17). Also; In our study, systemic healthy non-smoking of all participants can be shown as a limitation because it has been reported in the studies that smoking affects mediators, mainly involved in the inflammatory process (33). Similarly, it changes the inflammatory response in diseases such as diabetes mellitus (8).…”