RESUMEN
Após a divulgação do conceito de osseointegração por Brãnemark, baseado em anos de estudo, houve uma grande mudança na Odontologia moderna. Os tratamentos ganharam muitas variáveis no planejamento, normalmente mais estéticos e eficazes. Apesar da introdução dos implantes osseointegrados, com grande demanda e evolução da técnica, alguns fatores ainda limitam a colocação de um número adequado de implantes. Com isso, tem-se deparado com uma situação clínica de grande importância na Implantodontia: a restauração do edentulismo parcial utilizando pilares de dentes naturais unidos a implantes. O principal fator de preocupação ao se indicar a união dente/implante é a biomecânica, devido à diferença de absorção das forças oclusais pelos dois componentes distintos, dente e implante. Através de uma revisão de literatura, foram abordados os critérios biomecânicos dessa união, considerações sobre as formas de executá-la, as possíveis complicações e os achados clínicos das pesquisas. Embora os conceitos teóricos revelem problemas em potencial, os resultados clínicos apontam favoravelmente para o uso desse tipo de união. Segundo alguns profissionais, principalmente em segmentos curtos e com conexões rígidas, entretanto, o assunto é ainda bastante controverso.
After the popularization of the osseointegration concept from Branemark, based on years of study, there was a great turn in the modem dentistry. The treatments won many variation during prosthodontic planning related to aesthetics and efficacy. In spite of introduction of osseointegrated implants, technical developments and increase of indications, several factors still limit the use of an appropriate number of implants. With that, a critical situation in the Implantology: to use or not tooth-implant connection, and in using, what is the best way to do so. The main factor of relevance to indicate the tooth-implant connection is the biomechanics, due to the difference of absorption of the occlusal forces on the two different components, tooth and implant. Through literature review, the biomechanical criteria of this union, considerations of how to do it possible and the complications that could occur were discussed. Although the theoretical concepts reveal potentials problems, the clinical results appear favorable to the use of this type of union, mainly in short segments and with rigid connections.
Asunto(s)
Prótesis Dental , Retención de Prótesis Dentales , Implantes Dentales/métodos , Arcada Parcialmente Edéntula , Fenómenos Biomecánicos , Pilares Dentales , Mandíbula , MaxilarRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGBP) either laparoscopic or open has been increasingly employed in the treatment of patients with morbid obesity. Laparoscopic approach is believed to be superior over open approach in terms of shorter hospital stay and easier recovery. We aimed to assess feasibility and safety of open RYGBP with short stay in comparison with laparoscopic RYGBP. METHODS: One hundred and ninety consecutive patients were assigned to open (n=103) or laparoscopic (n=87) RYGBP. The first 20 patients of the laparoscopic arm were excluded due to procedure learning curve. Patients were treated by a multidisciplinary team focused on successfully RYGBP with short stay (1 day). RESULTS: Short stay was reached by 90% of patients operated with open approach and 81% by laparoscopy (P=0.070). Discharge in the second day was reached by 97% of patients in both groups. Procedure length [(median (IQR)] was faster for open RYGBP [103 (70-180 min) vs. 169 (105-248 min); P<0.0001]. Thirty-day readmission rate was similar between groups (3% vs. 7%; P=0.266). There was no death in either group. CONCLUSION: Short stay (1 day) following open gastric bypass was a feasible and safe procedure. This approach might have economic impact and might increase patient acceptance for open RYGBP.