Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
5.4
3.9
Journals
JCM
Special Issues
Clinical Advances in Dental Implant Surgery
share announcement

Clinical Advances in Dental Implant Surgery

A special issue of Journal of Clinical Medicine (ISSN 2077-0383). This special issue belongs to the section "Dentistry, Oral Surgery and Oral Medicine".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 31 May 2024 | Viewed by 2007

Special Issue Editors

Dr. Álvaro Jiménez-Guerra

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Odontostomatology, Oral Medicine Unit, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
Interests: implant surgery; dental implant systems; oral surgery; implant dentistry; oral implantology; bone regeneration; dental biomaterials
Dr. Loreto Monsalve-Guil

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Odontostomatology, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Seville, 41013 Seville, Spain
Interests: computer-guided implant surgery; surface charateristics of dental implants; peri-implant soft tissues and interfaces of dental implant systems; biomaterials and bone substitutes for implant dentistry

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Dental implants are now the state of the art in dental restorative therapy. They are used in the replacement of missing teeth, and provide retention and support for prostheses. The 21st century has brought permanent surgical innovation and vast clinical experience, resulting in the development of several techniques in the various areas of implant dentistry.

Conventional implant placement is performed when an adequate volume and quality of bone are present to provide osseointegration. However, advanced surgical procedures can be necessary in clinical cases with reduced alveolar bone. Alveolar ridge preservation in partially and totally edentulous patients constitutes a safe and predictable techinque for a better placement of implants in compromised locations. When ridge resorption occurs, bone augmentation is essential to achieve an adequate bone volume, providing patients with a satisfactory aesthetic result.

Some surgical procedures to obtain bone augmentation include maxillary sinus floor elevation, guided bone regeneration, bone grafting, and alveolar ridge expansión. An important number of different materials (autologous bone, xenogenic bone, alloplastics) have been used for bone augmentation, helping to obtain appropriate bone volume and morphology of edentulous crests for the better placement of implants.

Bone augmentation is required in implant placement sites with insufficient bone volume. Among the various techniques for the reconstruction of alveolar bone deficiency, the use of autogenous bone grafting or bone substitutes has become a reliable surgical technique. Moreover, recent advancements in bone-engineering techniques have made it possible to provide alternatives for new regenerative treatments because this technique requires only a small amount of tissue from the patients and can be used to repair bone defects without the problems of donor site morbidity.

The continuous development of digital implant surgery has led to a more predictable surgical evaluation of the implant recipient site. Cone-beam computed tomography scanning and modeling software have allowed clinicians to virtually plan treatment. In particular, prosthetically guided approaches to implant insertion, fully digital, are currently a possible and recommended alternative. Dental implant surgical planning has evolved from using static guides to computer generated guides and dynamic surgical guidance. Dynamic surgical placement has started gaining traction with the use of navigated surgery and robot-assisted implant placement.

Dr. Álvaro Jiménez-Guerra
Dr. Loreto Monsalve-Guil
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Journal of Clinical Medicine is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • dental implant
  • guided implant surgery
  • advanced implant surgery
  • sinus lift
  • zygomatic implant
  • bone regeneration
  • short implant

Published Papers (3 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

11 pages, 1211 KiB  
Article
Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation and Simultaneous Implant Installation via Osseodensification Drills: A Retrospective Analysis of Bone Gain in 72 Patients Followed for 6 Months
by Alper Saglanmak, Ihsan Caglar Cinar, Mohammed Zboun, Volkan Arisan and Eitan Mijiritsky
J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13(8), 2225; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/jcm13082225 - 11 Apr 2024
Viewed by 526
Abstract
Background/Objectives: The aim of this retrospective study was to radiographically evaluate the endo-sinus bone gain (ESBG) following osseodensification procedures using CBCT and compare the results to more conventional sinus lifting techniques. Methods: A total of 72 patients underwent crestal sinus floor [...] Read more.
Background/Objectives: The aim of this retrospective study was to radiographically evaluate the endo-sinus bone gain (ESBG) following osseodensification procedures using CBCT and compare the results to more conventional sinus lifting techniques. Methods: A total of 72 patients underwent crestal sinus floor elevation procedures and were provided with 102 implants with a sand-blasted and acid-etched surface with microthreads (Medentika® Microcone Implants, Hugelsheim, Germany). Patients were divided into two groups; the osseodensification group (OD; n = 36) and the osseodensified augmentation group (ODA; n = 36). Results: The mean residual bone height (RBH) was 5.71 (1.77) and 4.30 (0.94) mm in the OD and ODA groups, respectively. An ESBG of 3.45 (1.18) and 5.74 (1.31) mm was observed in the OD and ODA groups, respectively, and as compared to the baseline RBH, the ESBG was statistically significant in both groups after 6 months (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Within the limits of this retrospective study, crestal sinus lifting with the osseodensification technique seems to be a fast, effective, and safe method. Longer follow-up studies with full intrasinus bone topography and structure analyses are needed to prove the success rate of endo-sinus bone gain. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Clinical Advances in Dental Implant Surgery)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 1660 KiB  
Article
Early Implant Failure: A Meta-Analysis of 7 Years of Experience
by Radu Ionut Grigoras, Adina Cosarca and Alina Ormenișan
J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13(7), 1887; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/jcm13071887 - 25 Mar 2024
Viewed by 538
Abstract
Background: The use of dental implant rehabilitation in the treatment of complete and partial edentulism has become an integral treatment today. This treatment is performed on healthy patients, but in some situations, also on those with associated general ailments. The presence of associated [...] Read more.
Background: The use of dental implant rehabilitation in the treatment of complete and partial edentulism has become an integral treatment today. This treatment is performed on healthy patients, but in some situations, also on those with associated general ailments. The presence of associated conditions increases the degree of difficulty of this type of treatment and tests the doctor’s ability to manage the clinical case. The purpose of the study was to perform a meta-analysis of dental implants inserted over seven years and evaluate early implant failure in correspondence with age, sex, region of insertion, type of implant, and general state of health. Methods: A retrospective study was performed over 7 years of experience. For the study, 213 patients who fit the established inclusion criteria were selected. Patients were grouped taking into account age, sex, the type of implant used, and general associated conditions. The collected data were analyzed using IBM SPSS STATISTICS 25.0 for windows Results: There were no highlighted situations in which the rejection of the dental implant occurred 10 days postoperatively or later during the healing period. Conclusions: Our results confirm and strengthen the existing data in the specialized literature, especially those related to the loss of implants in patients with associated general diseases. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Clinical Advances in Dental Implant Surgery)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 493 KiB  
Article
Osseodensification vs. Conventional Osteotomy: A Case Series with Cone Beam Computed Tomography
by José Adriano Costa, José Manuel Mendes, Filomena Salazar, José Júlio Pacheco, Paulo Rompante, Joaquim Ferreira Moreira, José Diogo Mesquita, Nuno Adubeiro and Marco Infante da Câmara
J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13(6), 1568; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/jcm13061568 - 9 Mar 2024
Viewed by 665
Abstract
Introduction: Osseodensification is a non-extraction technique using specially designed drills to increase bone density while extending an osteotomy, allowing bone to be preserved and condensed by compacting autograft during osteotomy preparation, increasing bone density around implants, and improving mechanical stability. Aim: [...] Read more.
Introduction: Osseodensification is a non-extraction technique using specially designed drills to increase bone density while extending an osteotomy, allowing bone to be preserved and condensed by compacting autograft during osteotomy preparation, increasing bone density around implants, and improving mechanical stability. Aim: The objective of this study is to compare conventional osteotomy and osseodensification protocols in implant placement and analyze whether there are differences in bone density. Materials and Methods: Study variables were defined, namely, osseodensification technique, conventional osteotomy technique, bone density, sex, area of location, implant dimensions, implant dimensions, and implant stability. Eligibility and exclusion criteria were defined. A step-by-step surgical protocol was developed. The surgeon and radiologist underwent intra-examiner calibration. A total of 15 patients were selected according to the eligibility criteria, and a total of 41 implants were inserted, 20 implants by conventional osteotomy and 21 by osseodensification. A cone beam computed tomography was performed one year after prosthetic rehabilitation to estimate bone density. Data were collected and recorded, and in the analysis of the association of variables, non-parametric tests were applied. Results: Significant statistical results were found in bone density values, with higher values being obtained with the osseodensification technique, that is, median density values of 1020, and median density values of 732 for the bone drilling technique. The results of the correlation between bone density in both techniques and sex, primary implant stability, implant dimensions and location area were statistically non-significant. Conclusions: Within the limitations of this study, there are differences in bone density between conventional osteotomy and osseodensification protocols. Bone density is increased with osseodensification over a study period of one year. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Clinical Advances in Dental Implant Surgery)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-3
Back to TopTop