Radiological evaluation of single implants in maxillary anterior sites with special emphasis on their relation to adjacent teeth: a 3-year follow-up study.

AIM: The aim of this study was to measure, in adults, changes in crest bone level around single dental implants in the anterior maxilla and continuous eruption of adjacent teeth. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this prospective study, 50 patients received single-implant-supported crowns in the maxillary anterior region. Enrolled patients lacked maxillary anterior teeth as a sequel to trauma or agenesis in the maxillary anterior region. Participants were followed during a 3-year period. Baseline radiographs were taken at the time of loading and then repeated at one- and 3-year recalls. Radiographic parameters were recorded to assess changes in the skeletal bone structure and crest bone level. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients attended for all recalls. Three patients were excluded owing to difficulties related to identifying the same radiographic landmark on the radiographs throughout the recall period. All implants were successfully integrated with no sign of peri-implantitis. The mean crest bone loss was 0.45 mm at the mesial aspect of the implant and 0.56 mm at the distal aspect. In smokers, there was significant bone loss on the distal aspect. Mean change between reference points on implant and adjacent tooth (continuous eruption of adjacent tooth) over the 3-year period was 0.67 mm. In women, mean change (0.79 mm) was statistically insignificantly higher, compared with men (0.59 mm). CONCLUSIONS: Radiographic evaluation of crest bone level showed slight bone loss after 3 years of functional loading. Some changes in the eruption of neighbouring teeth were seen. Being a smoker was associated with significant negative changes related to the crest bone level.

Aesthetics of implant-supported single anterior maxillary crowns evaluated by objective indices and participants' perceptions.

AIM: The objective of this study was to evaluate the aesthetics of implant-supported single crowns in the anterior maxilla using objective indices and patients' perception. METHODS: Fifty participants, former patients (mean age 31.3 years) at the Dental Hospital, University of Bergen, or at Haukeland University Hospital in Bergen, Norway, who had implant-supported single crowns replacing upper anterior teeth lost due to trauma or agenesis during 2006, were included. One year after placement of the crown, an evaluation was carried out using the Pink Aesthetic Score (PES), the Implant Crown Aesthetics Index (ICAI), a modified version of the ICAI (mod-ICAI), and the index of the Californian Dental Association (CDA). The participants rated their satisfaction with the crowns and adjacent soft tissue. RESULTS: The form of the crown was satisfactory for 88% and the colour for 84% of participants, while 72% were satisfied with the adjacent mucosa. A statistically significant bivariate correlation was found between the PES and the ICAI and mod-ICAI. A weaker association was found between the CDA and the ICAI, mod-ICAI and PES. A positive correlation was found between the mod-ICAI index and satisfaction with the form and colour of the crowns and with the sum of ratings of responses to the questions about the form and colour of the crowns and the form and colour of the adjacent mucosa (P<0.05). Although most participants were satisfied, objective evaluation showed that a good aesthetic outcome for single implants was related to the quantity of the peri-implant mucosa. CONCLUSION: The mod-ICAI index correlated with responses to questions about the form and colour of the mucosa. Other significant correlations were found between the participants' aesthetic perceptions and the ICAI and the mod-ICAI. The mod-ICAI combined best objective and subjective assessment of aesthetics related to implant-supported crowns.

A study of 25 zygomatic dental implants with 11 to 49 months' follow-up after loading.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate indications, surgical problems, complications, and treatment outcomes related to the placement of zygomatic implants. A second aim was to determine any prosthetic difficulties and complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-five zygomatic implants were placed in 13 patients between April 1999 and December 2001. The patient age range was between 49 and 73 years, with a mean age of 59 years. All patients showed severe resorption of alveolar bone in the maxilla. All but 2 patients were smokers. Two patients had a history of cleft palate surgery, and 2 patients were known to be bruxers. Standard recommended surgical protocol was followed, and treatment was performed under general anesthesia. After abutment surgery, 9 patients received bar-retained overdentures, and 4 patients received fixed prostheses. RESULTS: No implants were lost, and few surgical complications were experienced. The follow-up period was 11 to 49 months. DISCUSSION: Although surgical problems precipitated by difficult anatomy in cleft patients and a patient with reduced interarch access were experienced, the results were favorable. Fabricating a functional and esthetic prosthesis can be a challenge. CONCLUSION: Zygomatic implants provide a treatment option for patients with severe maxillary resorption, defects, or situations where previous implant treatment has failed. In this experience, treatment with zygomatic implants was a predictable method with few complications, even in a group of patients that would not be considered ideal for implant treatment.