Search results for: A. Pimkhaokham

Authors: Pongsakorn Komutpol, Pravej Serichetaphongse, Soontra Panmekiate, Atiphan Pimkhaokham

Abstract:

Statement of Problem: The important parameter of esthetic assessment in anterior maxillary implant include pink esthetic of gingiva and white esthetic of restoration. While the 3 dimensional (3D) implant position are recently concerned as a key for succeeding in implant treatment. However, to our knowledge, the authors did not come across any publication that demonstrated the relations of esthetic outcome and 3D implant position. Objectives: To investigate the correlation between positional accuracy of single-tooth implant restoration (STIR) in all 3 dimensions and their esthetic outcomes. Materials and Methods: 17 patients’ data who had a STIR at central incisor with pristine contralateral tooth were included in this study. Intraoral photographs, dental models, and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images were retrieved. The esthetic outcome was assessed in accordance with pink esthetic score and white esthetic score (PES/WES). While the number of correct position in each dimension (mesiodistal, labiolingual, apicocoronal) of the implant were evaluated and defined as 'right' or 'wrong' according to ITI consensus conference by one investigator using CBCT data. The different mean score between right and wrong position in all dimensions was analyzed by Mann-Whitney U test with 0.05 was the significant level of the study. Results: The average score of PES/WES was 15.88 ± 1.65 which was considered as clinically acceptable. The average PES/WES score in 1, 2 and 3 right dimension of the implant position were 16.71, 15.75 and 15.17 respectively. None of the implants placed wrongly in all three dimensions. Statistically significant difference of the PES/WES score was found between the implants that placed right in 3 dimensions and 1 dimension (p = 0.041). Conclusion: This study supported the principle of 3D position of implant. The more properly implant was placed, the higher esthetic outcome was found.

Keywords: accuracy, dental implant, esthetic, 3D implant position

Procedia PDF Downloads 180

Authors: R. Janyaphadungpong, A. Pimkhaokham

Abstract:

This prospective clinical study determined the insertion torque (IT) value and monitored the changes in implant stability quotient (ISQ) values during the 12 weeks healing period from implant placement without bone graft (control group) and with bone graft using the guided bone regeneration (GBR) technique (study group). The relationship between the IT and ISQ values of the implants was also assessed. The control and study groups each consisted of 6 patients with 8 implants per group. The ASTRA TECH Implant System™ EV 4.2 mm in diameter was placed in the posterior mandibular region. In the control group, implants were placed in bone without bone graft, whereas in the study group implants were placed simultaneously with the GBR technique at favorable bone defect. IT (Ncm) of each implant was recorded when fully inserted. ISQ values were obtained from the Osstell® ISQ at the time of implant placement, and at 2, 4, 8, and 12 weeks. No difference in IT was found between groups (P = 0.320). The ISQ values in the control group were significantly higher than in the study group at the time of implant placement and at 4 weeks. There was no significant association between IT and ISQ values either at baseline or after the 12 weeks. At 12 weeks of healing, the control and study groups displayed different trends. Mean ISQ values for the control group decreased over the first 2 weeks and then started to increase. ISQ value increases were statistically significant at 8 weeks and later, whereas mean ISQ values in the study group decreased over the first 4 weeks and then started to increase, with statistical significance after 12 weeks. At 12 weeks, all implants achieved osseointegration with mean ISQ values over the threshold value (ISQ>70). These results indicated that implants, in which guided bone regeneration technique was performed during implant placement for treating favorable bone defects, were as predictable as implants placed without bone graft. However, loading in implants placed with the GBR technique for correcting favorable bone defects should be performed after 12 weeks of healing to ensure implant stability and osseointegration.

Keywords: dental implant, favorable bone defect, guided bone regeneration technique, implant stability

Procedia PDF Downloads 297