The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, Pre-Print

Purpose: The aims of the study were to evaluate the clinical performance and the complications of combined tooth-implant supported 3 unit fixed partial dentures in the posterior mandible. Materials and methods: 78 partially edentulous patients in the posterior mandible were recruited for the study (n=26/group). Group 1 served as the control group and received 2 dental implants for supporting 3 unit fixed partial dentures (FPD). Groups 2 and 3 were the experimental groups where an implant was combined with a tooth. As stated by the dental implant company, standard implants (8 mm or longer) were included in Group 2, while short implants (shorter than 8 mm) were included in Group 3. Periapical radiographs were taken for evaluation of marginal bone resorption (CBL). Modified plaque index (MPI), bleeding index (BI) and sulcus depth of abutment teeth was recorded at the time of FPD insertion, 6 months after FPD insertion and annually. Abutment tooth intrusions, cementation failures of the restorations, porcelain chipping/delamination, framework fracture, abutment screw loosening, abutment and abutment screw fracture, implant fracture were also recorded as complications. Results: Statistically significant different was observed between group 1 (.06 .17) and group 2 (.18 .32) and group 1 and group 3 (.17 .30) in terms of MPI (p≤0.05). No difference was observed between group 2 (.11 .34) and group 3(.14 .36) and group 1(.04 .22) and group 2 in terms of BI. There was statistically significant difference in terms of CBL between group 1 (.259 .05 mm) and group 3 (.11 .03 mm), and group 2 (.03 .03 mm) and group 3 (p≤0.05).The mean abutment tooth sulcus depth was 1.11 .31 mm for group 2 and 1.20 .46 mm for group 3. Conclusion: Within the limitations of the current study, it was concluded that combined tooth-implant supported prostheses (CTISP) is a predictable treatment choice in posterior mandible. When CTISP is planned, it is more predictable to use short dental implant rather than a standard-length dental implant. 

Purpose: To assess the peri-implant and flap parameters of the prefabricated microvascular fibula flap and determine the dental implant survival rate. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study investigated a cohort of subjects who received prefabricated microvascular fibula flaps at two highly specialized tumor reconstruction centers. The subjects had all suffered atrophy or a large segmental defect of the jaws due to tumor resection or injury. Two independent surgeons determined the dental implant survival rate and assessed the peri-implant parameters and flap parameters during clinical follow-up. Results: In total, 41 subjects were treated with a prefabricated fibula flap between 1999 and 2012. Of these, 17 subjects (10 male, 7 female) with a total of 62 dental implants were examined. The other 24 subjects were unavailable for assessment and had to be excluded. Ten of the 62 dental implants (16.1%) had to be removed due to peri-implantitis before the follow-up assessment. Follow-up assessments were performed at intervals ranging from 2 to 12 years (mean: 7.2 years) after fibula flap transplantation. The dental implant survival rate was found to be 83.9%. A total of 208 dental surfaces were assessed. Overall, 96% of all surfaces had a pocket depth (PD) of ≤ 4 mm and 4% had a pocket depth of > 5 mm. An attachment level (AL) of 3 mm was measured in 48.5% of implants and ≥ 5 mm was measured in 15.9% of implants. Dental implants with a PD > 4 mm showed a significantly higher plaque index (PI) (75%; P = .0057), papillary bleeding index (PBI) (62.5%; P = .0094), and radiologic bone loss (P = .0014) compared to dental implants with a PD ≤ 4 mm. Conclusions: Reconstructive surgery using microvascular fibula flaps represents an alternative tool for oral rehabilitation in subjects suffering from a large segmental defect in the maxillary or mandibular bone compared to the conventional method. However, it appears that the different ossification processes that develop the fibula and the jawbones affect dental implant survival. 

Purpose: To examine the stresses caused by different All-on-4 surgical techniques—conventional, a combination of monocortical and bicortical, bicortical, and nasal floor elevation—on the implant and the surrounding bone using 3D finite element analysis (FEA). Materials and Methods: A 3D bone model of the  atrophic maxilla was created based on CT imaging of the fully edentulous adult patient. All implants used in the models were 4 mm in diameter, and the length was 13 mm in the anterior and 15 mm in the posterior. Implants were applied to four different atrophic maxillary models with the All-on-4 technique: anterior and posterior monocortical implants in the first model, anterior monocortical and posterior bicortical in the second model, anterior and posterior bicortical in the third model, and anterior and posterior bicortical with nasal floor elevation in the fourth model. Eight linear analyses were performed by applying force from both vertical and 45-degree oblique directions to the four models prepared in our study. Results: When the cortical and cancellous bone around the anterior implants was examined, it was observed that the oblique and vertical loading conditions and the stresses around the implant were similar in all models. When the posterior implants were examined, model 1 (ie, anterior and posterior monocortical implants) showed the greatest oblique compression, vertical compression, and vertical tension forces. According to the Von Mises stress (VMS) analysis results for anterior and posterior implants, higher values were observed in model 1 compared to models 3 and 4 under oblique and vertical forces. It was observed that bicortical placement of the implants reduced the stresses on the bone and implant-abutment system but had no significant effect on the stress on the bar. Conclusions: According to the results of our study, in the All-on-4 technique, bicortical placement of the implants reduced the stresses on the bone and implant when the anatomical limitations allowed. In addition, nasal floor elevation can be applied in the atrophic maxilla in appropriate indications. 

Purpose: To compare the standard 360-degree CBCT acquisition protocol to the low dose 180-degree CBCT protocol for implant planning. Materials and methods: Two groups of patients, each consisting of 35 patients, were included in the study. The first group was imaged with the conventional 360-degree CBCT protocol, and the second group was imaged with the low dose 180-degree CBCT protocol. The primary outcome of this study was the number of scans that needed to be repeated due to poor image quality. In addition, six secondary parameters were evaluated quantitatively and qualitatively. Results: The results showed that there was no need to repeat any of the CBCT scans that were obtained in either group, which showed that 360-degree and 180-degree protocols had comparable image quality. As for the secondary parameters, the results showed that the evaluators were able to evaluate the six chosen parameters in a comparable manner. Conclusion: The 180-degree low dose CBCT scan is a viable option for dental implant treatment planning in the posterior mandible as it provides comparable and adequate information regarding accuracy of measurements, identification of critical structures, evaluation of bone quality, and any pathology. Keywords: CBCT, implant planning, 180-degree, dental implant, ALARA, radiation, low-dose radiation, radiology

Purpose: To examine the changes of dentoalveolar structures and pathologies in the maxillary sinus before and after dental implant surgery alone or with direct vs indirect sinus lifting using CBCT images of the maxillary posterior region. Materials and Methods: Preoperative and postoperative CBCT images of 50 sinus sites and the alveolar bone around 83 implants in 28 patients were evaluated. Maxillary sinus pathologies were classified as mucosal thickening (MT), mucus retention cyst (MRC), polyp, and sinusitis before and after surgery. The changes after surgery were determined to be no change, reduction in pathology, or increase in pathology. Comparisons of pathology changes among the treatment groups were evaluated statistically with chi-square test, McNemar test, and Mann-Whitney U test. Results: Of the 50 sinuses evaluated for the presence of sinus pathology, 24 of 50 did not change postoperatively, the pathology increased in 10 sinuses, and the pathology decreased in 16. When the maxillary sinus regions were evaluated after indirect sinus lifting, direct sinus lifting, and in patients who had only implant surgery, there was no statistically significant difference between pathology distribution in terms of the procedure applied to the sinus (P > .05). However, in the maxillary sinuses with a pathology before implant placement were evaluated postoperatively, a statistically significant difference was found in favor of the presence of a change in pathology (ie, improvement or a decrease; P < .05). The maxillary sinuses without pathology before implant placement showed a statistically significant difference for no change; ie, continuation of the healthy state (P < .05). Conclusion: This study showed that surgical procedures could have a direct effect on the sinus membrane and maxillary sinus. Both the implant procedure and surgical approach may have an effect on maxillary sinus pathology, as well as an increase or decrease of the pathology. Hence, further studies with a longer-term follow-up should be performed to better understand the correlation between implant surgery and pathology.