Current Concepts and Trends in Biomechanics and Biomaterials of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants

Abstract

The science of Implantology has undergone numerous modifications and improvement and is highly dynamic. With each improvement and advancement, Implantology has proved to be a boon in disguise to the society and hence its acceptance by the general population has widely increased despite of expensive treatment modality. More of clinical trials conducted on different commercially available implants, its effect on bone and oral tissues as well as the development of implant designs, have increased the success rate of implants to over 95% and specially in anterior mandible where the success rate is over 99%. Latest technological advances in Dental Implantology are reviewed in this article.

Differences in Dental Implant Survival between Immediate vs. Delayed Placement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…The studies included in this review found that crestal bone losses were unfavourable for the immediate implant placement group as compared to the delayed placement groups; given that the losses were significantly different but the extent of loss at 12 months tended not to exceed the accepted 1.5 mm threshold, the findings were not considered clinically meaningful. However, the previous literature contradicts the findings of this review with some authors revealing crestal bone loss among both immediate and delayed implant placements more than 1.5 mm at or prior to 12 months post-surgery [38][39][40]. Therefore, there is uncertainty about whether immediate or delayed implant placement causes any significant difference in crestal bone losses with time.…”

Improvement of PDMS surface biocompatibility is limited by the duration of oxygen plasma treatment

“…Natural look after surgery and get rid of prosthesis maintenance are of the most outstanding reasons leads to more patient satisfaction in the case of intrinsic maxillofacial implants and makes it far more marketable product rather than its counterpart (i.e., extrinsic maxillofacial prosthesis). There are different kinds of material intended to retrieve orofacial defects as intrinsic maxillofacial implants (Jindal & Kumar, ); poly methyl methacrylate (PMMA), poly urethane (PU), and polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) are some cases in point (Abraham, Krishanga, Philip, Venkatakrishnan, & Chandran, ). Considering state‐of‐the‐art materials used in this area, PDMS is widely the material of choice because of its intrinsic nature that makes it complied with biological demands (Mitra, Choudhary, Garg, & Jagadeesh, ).…”