Recent advances in dental implants

Abstract

Dental implants are a common treatment for the loss of teeth. This paper summarizes current knowledge on implant surfaces, immediate loading versus conventional loading, short implants, sinus lifting, and custom implants using three-dimensional printing. Most of the implant surface modifications showed good osseointegration results. Regarding biomolecular coatings, which have been recently developed and studied, good results were observed in animal experiments. Immediate loading had similar clinical outcomes compared to conventional loading and can be used as a successful treatment because it has the advantage of reducing treatment times and providing early function and aesthetics. Short implants showed similar clinical outcomes compared to standard implants. A variety of sinus augmentation techniques, grafting materials, and alternative techniques, such as tilted implants, zygomatic implants, and short implants, can be used. With the development of new technologies in three-dimension and computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) customized implants can be used as an alternative to conventional implant designs. However, there are limitations due to the lack of long-term studies or clinical studies. A long-term clinical trial and a more predictive study are needed.

Efficacy of Collagen-Based Membranes in Alveolar Bone Augmentation

“…More thread exposures were observed when multiple prostheses were connected, when the crown to root ratio was not physiologic, or when non-submerged implantation was performed. These results suggest that early implant bone loss is more likely to occur as a result of the already established causes such as surgical trauma, occlusal overload, and microgap, regardless of the type of membrane used [21,22].…”

Do short implants have similar survival rates compared to standard implants in posterior single crown?: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…[82][83][84][85] The other two studies included in the present review used SLA surface implants, treated with sandblasting and acid etching, with excellent results of both survival rate and MBL. [86][87][88] The two types of surface treatment used in the included studies provided excellent bone-to-implant contact, contributing to the longevity of implant stability on function, 89 90 Laboratory studies have shown higher stress in the coronal part of the implant and on its abutment, with consequent more fatigue when using implants with external hexagon with switching platform than implants with regular external hexagon, but with no difference between regular internal hexagon connections implants and internal hexagon connections implants with switching platform. 91,92 In this present review, prosthetic failure was only reported in the study by Pohl et al 71 This good result may be related to the fact that all included studies used implants with internal connection and switching platform: the study by Rossi et al 40 used implants with internal octagon connection and the other three studies 39,70,71 used implants with internal hexagon connections.…”

Modal analysis for implant stability assessment: Sensitivity of this methodology for different implant designs

“…The question is therefore: how long should the healing period last? This debate is still open and is the object of many research studies [8,9]. Seemingly, absolute indications cannot be given since the patient bone quality, the kind of implant and the outcome of surgical technique play a fundamental role [7,10,11].…”