RESUMEN

Full-arch implant reconstructions are being utilized in clinical practice today. Very often these prostheses are prosthetically driven, but not periodontally maintainable. Often the patient presents to the general practitioner with a failing implant reconstruction, where several fixtures need to be removed and others are maintainable. The article presents a case report where a removable prosthesis is used as a transitional appliance during the retreatment of the case. A removable complete overdenture prosthesis using attachments was used to establish proper occlusion and function, prevent loading on the guided bone regeneration sites, and to assist in fabrication of a stable guide for implant placement. The staged approach facilitated laser periodontal therapy on the remaining fixtures, and allowed proper oral hygiene instruction and assessment of the patient's ability to clean the remaining fixtures properly. Although the potential to treat this case with transitional implants or immediate load fixtures was discussed, the risk versus benefit scenario favored a removable prosthesis with attachments. Success required proper communication between the surgeon, restorative dental practitioner, laboratory, and patient. (Quintessence Int 2023;54:126-132; doi: 10.3290/j.qi.b3648969).

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Osseointegration is the basis of successful dental implantology and the foundation of cementless arthroplasty and the osseointegrated percutaneous prosthetic system. Osseointegration has been considered irreversible thus far. However, controlled heating or cooling of dental implants could selectively damage the bone at the bone-implant interface, causing the reversal of osseointegration or "osseodisintegration". This review compares five methods for implant removal, published as patent documents between 2010 and 2018, which have not yet been discussed in the scientific literature. We describe these methods and evaluate their potential for reversing osseointegration. The five methods have several technical and methodological similarities: all methods include a handpiece, a connecting device for coronal access, and a controlling device, as well as the application of mechanical and/or thermal energy. The proposed method of quantifying the temperature with a sensor as the sole means for regulating the process seems inadequate. A database used in one of the methods, however, allows a more precise correlation between a selected implant and the energy needed for its removal, thus avoiding unnecessary trauma to the patient. A flapless, microinvasive, and bone-conserving approach for removing failed dental implants, facilitating successful reimplantation, would benefit dental implantology. These methods could be adapted to cementless medical implants and osseointegrated percutaneous prosthetics. However, for some of the methods discussed herein, further research may be necessary.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is seen to be associated with increased rate of failure of implants. The implant failure can be categorized as ailing, failing, and failed implants. The review of literature did not form any consensus on the effect of diabetes on the implant success rates. The reason we found was many confounding factors and nonconsideration of glycemic status of diabetic patients. Hence, in our study, we eliminated the confounding factors and took glycemic index in consideration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-six participants were included in this study, out of which 26 were nondiabetic and 20 diabetic. Diabetics were further divided into two groups based on the HBA1C values, as controlled and uncontrolled diabetics. RESULTS: We found that the uncontrolled diabetics had highest rate of implant failure as compared to other two groups. Furthermore, the controlled diabetics and nondiabetics had similar implant successes and failure rates. CONCLUSION: This suggests that controlled diabetics are comparable to nondiabetics in terms of implant success rates.

RESUMEN

Revision surgeries, as well as conversions from implants to arthrodesis, can present unique challenges to the foot and ankle surgeon. Proper perioperative planning assists in optimizing the outcome of the procedure. In general, some amount of bone loss and/or shortening of the first metatarsal takes place, leading to the need for augmenting the site with bone graft or a synthetic substitute. Fixation also plays a key role in obtaining a successful conversion. A solid construct combined with bone graft assists the foot and ankle surgeon in achieving an optimal outcome.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJETIVO El objetivo del presente estudio descriptivo es la valoración de un nuevo método de remoción de implantes oseointegrados bajo una técnica mínimamente invasiva. MATERIALES Y MÉTODOS El estudio fue desarrollado sobre un grupo de 66 implantes oseointegrados de conexión interna y externa diagnosticados en falla, a los cuales se les indicó su remoción quirúrgica por presentar un diagnóstico radiográfico de pérdida ósea periimplantaria, mal posicionamiento quirúrgico con imposibilidad de rehabilitación protésica o daño del elemento de retención protésico del implante. El procedimiento quirúrgico, el cual es de carácter ambulatorio, fue llevado a cabo en un pabellón bajo anestesia local. Como primera opción de remoción quirúrgica, el procedimiento consistió en la utilización de instrumental de remoción a contra-torque, sin la apertura de un colgajo de espesor total, y como segunda opción de remoción quirúrgica la utilización de una fresa trefina, para lo cual fue necesario realizar un colgajo de espesor total que expusiera el lecho implantario. RESULTADOS Se removieron un total de 66 implantes oseointegrados, todos bajo la primera modalidad de remoción a contra-torque con el nuevo instrumento, sin colgajo y sin la necesidad de usar fresa trefina. CONCLUSIONES Con las limitaciones de este estudio preliminar planteamos que la utilización del nuevo instrumento de remoción a contra-torque de implantes oseointegrados en fallo se vislumbra como una muy buena alternativa de remoción quirúrgica mínimamente invasiva, disminuyendo los riesgos quirúrgicos del uso de una fresa trefina, el daño a los tejidos aledaños.

OBJECTIVE The aim of this study is the evaluation of a new removal method of osseointegrated implants under a minimally invasive technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS The study was conducted on a group of 66 osseointegrated internal and external connection implants that were considered unsuccesful. The surgical removal was indicated after radiologically confirming peri-implant bone loss, and poor positioning which made the prosthetic rehabilitation impossible, or would damage the prosthetic implant retainer. The surgical procedure was developed in an operating room under local anesthesia. As first surgical removal option, the procedure consisted of the use of a removal instrument that works against torque and which does not need a full thickness flap to reach the surgical site; and as a second surgical removal option a trephine bur was used. For this option, a full thickness flap was performed in order to expose the surgical site. RESULTS A total of 66 osseointegrated implants were removed under the first mode, with no full thickness flaps or Trephine burs required. CONCLUSIONS Within the limitations of this preliminary study, we propose that the use of this new, against torque, removal instrument of osseointegrated implants in failure is seen as a very good alternative to invasive surgical removal techniques, reducing surgical risks.

Asunto(s)