Wedge-Shaped Implants for Minimally Invasive Treatment of Narrow Ridges: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study

Vercellotti, Tomaso; Troiano, Giuseppe; Oreglia, Francesco; Lombardi, Teresa; Gregorig, Gianluca; Morella, Emanuele; Rapani, Antonio; Stacchi, Claudio

doi:10.3390/jcm9103301

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As suggested by other authors, good compaction of bone trabeculae in bone marrow may justify high ISQ values, especially in the crestal region [30,34,35]. Removal torque is another parameter indicating the relationship between bone and implant surface, especially for in vitro and ex vivo studies [36].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Can Bone Compaction Improve Primary Implant Stability? An In Vitro Comparative Study with Osseodensification Technique

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: This study aims to analyze bone compaction and osseodensification techniques and to investigate how cancellous bone compaction could influence primary implant stability (PS). Methods: Two different surgical protocols (bone compactors—BC; osseodensification drills—OD) were compared by placing 20 implants into 20 fresh pig ribs for each procedure. Peak insertion torque (PIT) and peak removal torque (PRT) were investigated using an MGT-12 digital torque gauge, and implant stability quotient (ISQ) was analyzed using an Osstell® Beacon device. Results: Analysis of our data (T-test p < 0.05) evidenced no statistically significant difference between BC and OD in terms of PIT (p = 0.33) or ISQ (p = 0.97). The comparison of PRT values showed a statistically significant difference between BC and OD protocols (p = 0.009). Conclusions: Cancellous bone compaction seems to improve PS, preserving a significant amount of bone and evenly spreading trabeculae on the entire implant site. Although the PIT and ISQ values obtained are similar, the PRT values suggest a better biological response from the surrounding bone tissue. Nevertheless, a larger sample and further in vivo studies are necessary to validate the usefulness of this protocol in several clinical settings.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Can Bone Compaction Improve Primary Implant Stability? An In Vitro Comparative Study with Osseodensification Technique

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, edentulous ridge width at implant placement site plays a crucial role: an adequate peri-implant bone envelope has a protective effect against the detrimental influence of the aforementioned factors on peri-implant marginal bone stability. In case of insufficient bone width, the clinician may perform horizontal ridge augmentation procedures [ 20 , 21 ], use implants with reduced diameter [ 22 , 23 ] or plan a combination of the above. Nevertheless, there is no agreement in the literature on the minimum amount of bone that should surround an implant.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of buccal and palatal bone thickness on post-surgical marginal bone changes around implants placed in posterior maxilla: a multi-centre prospective study

Cicciù

Pratella²,

Fiorillo

et al. 2023

BMC Oral Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Numerous clinical variables may influence early marginal bone loss (EMBL), including surgical, prosthetic and host-related factors. Among them, bone crest width plays a crucial role: an adequate peri-implant bone envelope has a protective effect against the influence of the aforementioned factors on marginal bone stability. The aim of the present study was to investigate the influence of buccal and palatal bone thickness at the time of implant placement on EMBL during the submerged healing period. Methods Patients presenting a single edentulism in the upper premolar area and requiring implant-supported rehabilitation were enrolled following inclusion and exclusion criteria. Internal connection implants (Twinfit, Dentaurum, Ispringen, Germany) were inserted after piezoelectric implant site preparation. Mid-facial and mid-palatal thickness and height of the peri-implant bone were measured immediately after implant placement (T0) with a periodontal probe and recorded to the nearest 0.5 mm. After 3 months of submerged healing (T1), implants were uncovered and measurements were repeated with the same protocol. Kruskal-Wallis test for independent samples was used to compare bone changes from T0 to T1. Multivariate linear regression models were built to assess the influence of different variables on buccal and palatal EMBL. Results Ninety patients (50 females, 40 males, mean age 42.9 ± 15.1 years), treated with the insertion of 90 implants in maxillary premolar area, were included in the final analysis. Mean buccal and palatal bone thickness at T0 were 2.42 ± 0.64 mm and 1.31 ± 0.38 mm, respectively. Mean buccal and palatal bone thickness at T1 were 1.92 ± 0.71 mm and 0.87 ± 0.49 mm, respectively. Changes in both buccal and palatal thickness from T0 to T1 resulted statistically significant (p = 0.000). Changes in vertical bone levels from T0 to T1 resulted not significant both on buccal (mean vertical resorption 0.04 ± 0.14 mm; p = 0.479) and palatal side (mean vertical resorption 0.03 ± 0.11 mm; p = 0.737). Multivariate linear regression analysis showed a significant negative correlation between vertical bone resorption and bone thickness at T0 on both buccal and palatal side. Conclusion The present findings suggest that a bone envelope > 2 mm on the buccal side and > 1 mm on the palatal side may effectively prevent peri-implant vertical bone resorption following surgical trauma. Trial Registration The present study was retrospectively recorded in a public register of clinical trials (www.clinicaltrials.gov - NCT05632172) on 30/11/2022.

show abstract

“…This technique involves a barrier membrane to exclude soft tissue ingrowth and create a space for the growth of newly mineralized tissue in the affected area. In terms of bone gain, studies have reported that GBR can provide a vertical increase of 2–8 mm, with an implant survival rate ranging from 92.1 to 100% . However, the lack of stability and ability to maintain their shape demonstrated by the biomaterials, which may lead to an unpredictable final alveolar ridge profile, limit the applications of the conventional GBR technique.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In terms of bone gain, studies have reported that GBR can provide a vertical increase of 2−8 mm, with an implant survival rate ranging from 92.1 to 100%. 2 However, the lack of stability and ability to maintain their shape demonstrated by the biomaterials, which may lead to an unpredictable final alveolar ridge profile, limit the applications of the conventional GBR technique. In addition, Li et al reported that the percentage of resorption after 6 months of healing with resorbable membrane coverage reached 37.5%.…”

Section: ■ Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of Implant Healing Abutment Supporting Vertical Bone Augments in the Posterior Mandibular Area

Zhao

Zhang

et al. 2023

ACS Biomater. Sci. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To address the problem of insufficient bone mass in the implant area, we focused on the vertical increment of the posterior mandibular area to increase bone mass with the aid of a healing abutment. Data of patients with insufficient vertical bone height in the posterior mandibular area were collected, and vertical increment of alveolar bone operations was performed with the aid of a healing abutment. Preoperative residual alveolar bone height, immediate postoperative alveolar bone height, and 6-month postoperative alveolar bone height were recorded, with peri-implant soft tissue results 6 months after surgery using the modified plaque index and sulcus bleeding index. Twelve patients, aged 42–73 years, with an average age of 55.91 ± 11.58 years, received vertical bone augmentation in the posterior mandibular region supported by implant healing abutments. Fifteen SLA TSIII OSSTEM implants were utilized in the 12 patients; one patient failed in vertical bone augmentation at one site (H0 = 0 mm). The vertical bone augmentation effect of two patients at two sites was 0 mm < H0 < 1 mm, and the vertical bone augmentation effect of 12 sites in nine patients was H0 ≥ 1 mm. The implant success rate was 93.3%, and the mean vertical bone gain was 2.91 mm. Peri-implant soft tissue parameters are as follows: mean modified plaque index, 1.92; mean modified sulcus bleeding index, 1.21; and mean probing depth, 3.18. No clinically observable complications occurred. Bone augmentation supported by the implant healing abutment showed the characteristics of “platform transfer”, with good formation of the implant–bone interface. The bone augmentation surgery was completed at the same time as the implant placement, which reduced the pain of multiple operations and shortened waiting times. We provide a novel idea to solve the problem of insufficient vertical bone height in the posterior mandibular region.

show abstract

Wedge-Shaped Implants for Minimally Invasive Treatment of Narrow Ridges: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study

Cited by 9 publications

References 42 publications

Can Bone Compaction Improve Primary Implant Stability? An In Vitro Comparative Study with Osseodensification Technique

Can Bone Compaction Improve Primary Implant Stability? An In Vitro Comparative Study with Osseodensification Technique

Influence of buccal and palatal bone thickness on post-surgical marginal bone changes around implants placed in posterior maxilla: a multi-centre prospective study

Application of Implant Healing Abutment Supporting Vertical Bone Augments in the Posterior Mandibular Area

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About