Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of a New Fully Tapered Implant with the One-Abutment One-Time Approach: In-Line Clinical Case Series with a 1-Year Follow-up.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the bone level changes in a new implant design (fully tapered with platform switching) with the one-abutment one-time protocol after 1 year of loading. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty patients received 1 or 2 implants (6-, 8-, or 10-mm length and 3.5-, 3.75-, or 4.5-mm diameter, bone-level design) to replace one or multiple edentulous sites. Only the mesial implant was assessed. Radiographic, clinical, and esthetic results and the survival and success rates were evaluated 1 year after final loading. RESULTS: At 1 year, no peri-implant bone loss was seen in any of the cases. Mean marginal crestal bone loss between surgery and crown placement was 0.19 ± 0.17 mm (P < .0001). Between surgery and the 1-year follow-up, the mean marginal crestal bone loss was 0.25 ± 0.24 mm (P < .0001). The difference in the modified Plaque Index between 1 year of follow-up and crown placement was significant for in the mesial (0.33 ± 0.54 mm; P = .003) and distal surfaces (0.5 ± 0.73 mm; P = .001). The probing pocket depth was statistically significantly deeper at 1 year than at crown placement at the mesial and distal aspects (average depth = 0.75 mm; P < .0005). No statistically significant differences were found for any other clinical or esthetic parameters. The overall survival and success rates after 1 year were 100%. CONCLUSIONS: The fully tapered, deep-thread, platform-switched implant design placed with the one-abutment one-time protocol demonstrated minimal marginal crestal bone loss and crestal bone stability at 1 year of follow-up.

Innovative method "DV-PIMS" technique and dental implant design for grafting injectable platelet-rich fibrin around the dental implant - Goat jaw cadaver study.

AIMS: Dental implants have revolutionized the treatment modality for replacing missing teeth. The ability of implants to osseointegrate with the bone leads to its success. The problem is sometimes there is inadequate bone available for implant. If hygiene is not maintained, biofilms of bacteria can be formed around the dental implant. One approach to this problem has been development of bioactive surgical additives. Platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) appears as an alternative. There are various techniques of using PRF. These techniques need skill and practice to use PRF. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate implant stability and flow of injectable PRF (i-PRF) of regular implant and modified innovative design implant. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty goat jaw bones were selected. Implants were placed in mandibular posterior region. Fifteen implants were placed using regular dental implant system (Group A) on the left side of jaw bone. The other 15 implants were placed using modified dental implant (Group B) on the right side of jaw bone. The body of these implants at middle has drainage vents to drain/flow the i-PRF-like dye. The dye was injected through regular and modified implants (DV-PIMS technique). Then the stability was checked with the help of Periotest. Cross section was taken 3 cm away from dental implant at the angle of mandible, to check the flow of i-PRF/platelet-rich plasma (PRP)-like dye. RESULTS: Periotest evaluation showed a mean of 2.3 for implant Group B and a mean of 1.5 for implant Group A. The flow of i-PRF-like dye was seen in Group B, and Group A does not show any flow. CONCLUSION: There are various techniques of using PRF. These techniques need skill and practice to use PRF. This (DV-PIMS) method aims to explain new implant design that disperses an i-PRF solution from inside out. The screw section of the new implant is made of a reservoir running vertically down inside. That reservoir is filled with (injectable) PRF, and then a cover screw is placed. The solution will begin to slowly diffuse out, through the vents in implant, keeping biofilms from forming or avoiding at the screw-bone interface and accelerate healing process.

Single implant-supported restorations in the anterior maxilla.

Achieving functional and esthetic implant-supported single-tooth restorations in the anterior region of the maxilla can be particularly challenging. Insufficient hard tissue can preclude proper implant positioning, while inadequately treated soft tissue will not exhibit a gingival appearance similar to that of the adjacent teeth. The aims of this article are to analyze the different clinical possibilities (standard and compromised situations) for implant-supported single-tooth restorations in the anterior zone and highlight the importance of knowing the biologic, anatomic, surgical, and prosthetic concepts, particularly the interproximal bone height of adjacent teeth, in the prognosis and predictability of achieving an esthetic result.