Implantologie

Abstract

Endosseous osseointegrated implants have become an integral part of the treatment scheme for the prosthetic reconstruction and rehabilitation of masticatory function following scientific studies of the reactions between implant and soft and hard tissues. Furthermore, implants offer good chances for prosthetic rehabilitation in the insufficient bone site, if the extremely atrophic jaw is to be reconstructed by grafting procedures with avascular and vascular grafts, by guided bone regeneration, by distraction osteogenesis, by bone substitutes and in the future by osteoinductive proteins in order to prepare the conditions for implant insertion. Those reconstruction procedures combined with implants become often necessary, if complicated hard and soft tissue defects of the skull have to be reconstructed to create the prerequisites for the stabilisation of epitheses or to insert implant-supported devices.

Synthetic bone substitute material comparable with xenogeneic material for bone tissue regeneration in oral cancer patients: First and preliminary histological, histomorphometrical and clinical results

“…Inserted implants were examined after 2 years based on the previously described methods of Neukam and Esser, i.e., evaluation of implant position/stability, subjective discomfort, peri-implant infection, implant mobility and peri-implant osteolysis. [17]…”

“…Therefore, parameters for implant success were determined according to indices previously described by Neukam and Esser[17] [Table 4]. …”

Bioactivation of an anorganic bone matrix by P-15 peptide for the promotion of early bone formation

“…Modern maxillofacial surgery offers several treatment options in cases of insufficient bone volume in the jaws. Besides condensing topical bone before the insertion of dental implants, there are protocols for osteodistraction; and, currently in an experimental stage, for tissue regeneration by gene transfer [41][42][43][44]. When augmentation procedures are considered, autogenous bone is regarded to be the ideal material [45].…”

Diabetes mellitus negatively affects peri-implant bone formation in the diabetic domestic pig

“…A direct correlation has been shown between alterations in implant stability and impaired implant integration and hyperglycaemic conditions (Oates et al 2009). Diabetes mellitus is classified as a risk factor for implant treatment, and severe or poorly controlled diabetes mellitus has been suggested to be a contraindication for treatment with dental implants (Buser et al 2000, Neukam & Esser 2000). On the other hand, Tawil et al (2008) found that individuals with well‐controlled diabetes have implant survival rates similar to those of controls without diabetes.…”