Modern implant dentistry based on osseointegration: 50 years of progress, current trends and open questions

Abstract

In the 1960s and 1970s, implant-supported prostheses based on subperiosteal or blade implants had a poor reputation because of questionable clinical outcomes and lack of scientific documentation. The change to a scientifically sound discipline was initiated by the two scientific pioneers of modern implant dentistry, Professor P. I. Brånemark from the University of Gothenburg in Sweden and Professor André Schroeder from the University of Bern in Switzerland. Together with their teams, and independently of each other, they laid the foundation for the most significant development and paradigm shift in dental medicine. The present volume of Periodontology 2000 celebrates 50 years of osseointegration. It reviews the progress of implant therapy over the past 50 years, including the basics of implant surgery required to achieve osseointegration on a predictable basis and evolving innovations. The development of bone-augmentation techniques, such as guided bone regeneration and sinus floor elevation, to correct local bone defects at potential implant sites has increased the indications for implant therapy. The paradigm shift to moderately rough implant surfaces resulted in faster and enhanced bone integration and led to improvements in various treatment protocols, such as immediate and early implant placement in postextraction sites, and made various loading protocols possible, including immediate and early implant loading. In the past 15 years, preoperative analysis and presurgical planning improved as a result of the introduction of three-dimensional imaging techniques. Hereby, cone-beam computed tomography offers better image quality with reduced radiation exposure, when compared with dental computed tomography. This opened the door for digital planning and surgical modifications. Over the last 50 years this evolution has facilitated tremendous progress in esthetic outcomes with implant-supported prostheses and improved patient-centered outcomes. This volume of Periodontology 2000 also discusses the current trends and open questions of implant dentistry, such as the potential of digital implant dentistry in the surgical and prosthetic field, the trend for an increasing average age of implant patients and the related adaptations of treatment protocols, and the second attempt to establish ceramic implants using, this time, zirconia as the implant material. Finally, some of the hottest controversies are discussed, such as recent suggestions on bone integration being a potential foreign-body reaction and the evidence-based appraisal of the peri-implantitis debate.

The Use of Cone‐Beam Computed Tomography in Management of Patients Requiring Dental Implants: An American Academy of Periodontology Best Evidence Review

“…This century, the application of cross‐sectional imaging using cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) in implant dentistry has rapidly grown as a popular tool, driven by continued scientific and technologic advances 1 . Apart from replacing teeth lost due to injury, disease, or developmental disorders, increased life expectancy and esthetic concerns have accelerated the widespread acceptance of dental implants and other associated surgical procedures 2 . In dentistry, CBCT has been positioned as the modality of choice for cross‐sectional imaging as an application that certainly has tangible implications for implant therapy 3 .…”

Histological and Bone Morphometric Evaluation of Osseointegration Aspects by Alkali Hydrothermally-Treated Implants

“…Implant therapy is considered to be successful when osseointegration is established and maintained over a long period of time [1][2][3]. Titanium has good biocompatibility and establishes both direct integration and osseointegration with the surrounding bone; thus, titanium is used as a dental implant material [4].…”

The medically compromised patient: Are dental implants a feasible option?

“…() is in need of an update. Nowadays, among others, implant treatment needs less invasive surgery and thus this treatment can be applied with less risk of serious complications as well as that more studies are available that have shown that dental implant treatment in many diseases is feasible, either with or without specific precautions (Buser, Sennerby, & De Bruyn, ).…”