Evaluation of heat conduction in dental implants after exposure to hot beverages.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: It is unknown if the consumption of hot beverages after implant placement poses a danger of overheating at the bone-implant interface. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of simulated consumption of hot beverages on the heat transfer to different dental implant types, implant sizes, and the presence of an interim restoration. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A model that consisted of 2 plastic containers was constructed to simulate the oral cavity and endosseous region of the jaw. One-piece and 2-piece implants with abutments were placed into a block of bovine mandibular bone without any healing tissue, surrounded by water maintained at 37°C in the lower compartment. The abutments, which extended into the upper container, were covered with water heated to 60°C to simulate consumption of a hot substance and then were cooled down spontaneously to 37°C during 100 to 600 seconds. Five thermocouple electrodes with an accuracy of ±0.1°C were attached to each test specimen and to a computer with data recording and analysis software to record temperature changes. Repeated measures ANOVA (α=.05)was performed to determine the effect of each major factor. RESULTS: Heat conduction from the abutment exposed to hot liquid was significantly higher in the cervical as opposed to the apical areas of the implants. Implant type (1 piece), diameter (wider), and the absence of an interim coping had a significant effect on the maximum temperature measured and on the temperature change rate. CONCLUSIONS: Abutment exposure to hot liquids resulted in heat conduction to the cervical region of the implant, which could be biologically harmful in healing tissues. Heat conduction was mitigated by implant design and diameter, and by the presence of an interim prosthesis. Results may differ in clinical models.

One-year survival rate outcomes of innovative dental implants: a prospective clinical study.

PURPOSE: The aim of this research was to evaluate an innovative implant design for different placement and loading protocols. The unique implant is a combination of tapered and cylindrical shape, which is aimed to enhance initial stability and long-term osseointegration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four hundred and sixty implants were placed in 141 patients under different placement and loading protocols in similarity to those encountered in a dental office. Implants were followed and evaluated for 1 year to assert the survival rate of the newly introduced implant. RESULTS: The results showed a total of 97.4% survival rate, ranging from 92% to 98.6% depending on the different protocols. There was no statistical difference between the different protocol groups. CONCLUSION: The new implant design showed good results for 1 year of follow-up, comparable with the literature, and could be a good choice for every implant-based procedure.

Bone microstrain values of 1-piece and 2-piece implants subjected to mechanical loading.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to measure and compare the strain levels in peri-implant bone as generated by 1-piece (1P) and 2-piece (2P) implant systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The implants (1P and 2P) were placed into bovine bone according to the manufacturer's protocol. Four linear strain gauges were placed around each implant neck and apex. Each model was loaded in static loading by a material testing machine in ascending forces ranging from 20 to 120 N. Microstrains (µ[Latin Small Letter Open E]) generated in the surrounding bone were measured by a strain gauge and recorded. RESULTS: Recorded microstrains were significantly higher for 1P implants than for 2P implants. Average recorded microstrain values were significantly lower in the neck (71.6 and 17.3 µs) compared with the apical (132 and 60 µs) regions of 1P and 2P implants, respectively (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this study, highest microstrains were generated in apical regions regardless of implant design, but the 2P implant ap-peared to provide a stress-damping effect in both the cervical and apical regions compared with the 1P implant.

A 10-year retrospective clinical evaluation of immediately loaded tapered maxillary implants.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of immediate loading (IL) and delayed loading (DL) on peri-implant crestal bone loss around maxillary implants after long-term functioning. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted to assess the outcomes of 110 tapered, multithreaded implants placed for the treatment of one or more missing and/or unsalvageable teeth in the maxilla of 23 patients. Implants were assigned to either the DL or IL database according to loading time. Marginal bone changes were calculated using standardized radiographs taken at implant placement (baseline) and during annual follow-ups. RESULTS: One implant failed in the DL group. After a mean follow-up of 111 months in the DL group and 119 months in the IL group, cumulative implant survival was 99.09% (DL = 98.11%, IL = 100%). No observable bone loss was evident in 83.49% of the surviving implants. Cumulative success rates were 100% for the IL group and 98.11% for the DL group. CONCLUSIONS: Immediately loaded maxillary implants showed long-term results comparable to delayed loaded maxillary implants.

Retrospective clinical evaluation of tapered implants: 10-year follow-up of delayed and immediate placement of maxillary implants.

OBJECTIVES: To retrospectively evaluate the clinical outcome of tapered, multithreaded implants (Tapered Screw-Vent MTX; Zimmer Dental, Inc, Carlsbad, CA) with an emphasis on periimplant crestal bone status around those placed delayed and immediately in the posterior and anterior maxilla. METHODS: Chart reviews were performed on 46 patients who had been treated with 173 implants replacing one or more missing and/or unsalvageable teeth in the maxilla. Implant placement and loading was either immediate or delayed. Marginal bone changes were calculated using standardized radiographs taken at implant placement and during annual follow-up. RESULTS: After a mean follow-up of 119 to 121 months, implant survival rate was 99%, and implant success rate was 97%. No discernable bone loss was evident in 85.5% of the surviving implants. Crestal bone loss was observed in 14.5% of all surviving implants: 38.5% of implants immediately loaded and 29.9% of implants with delayed loading. Twenty-one implants exhibited 1 mm of bone loss, 3 implants lost 2 mm, and 1 implant lost 3 mm. Low-density maxillary jawbone and more extensive bone remodeling required around implants immediately placed into extraction sockets were the probable causes of observed bone loss in this study. CONCLUSIONS: Implants exhibited excellent long-term outcomes with little or no bone loss.