Ghent University Academic Bibliography

Advanced

Surgical protocol and short-term clinical outcome of immediate placement in molar extraction sockets using a wide body implant

Stefan Vandeweghe UGent, André Hattingh, Ann Wennerberg and Hugo De Bruyn UGent (2011) JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL RESEARCH. 2(3).
abstract
Objectives: Implant placement in molar extraction sockets can be difficult due to complex multi-root anatomy and the lack of predictable primary stability. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of an 8 - 9 mm diameter tapered implant, designed to be placed in molar extraction sockets. Material and methods: Patients treated at least 1 year before with a Max® implant (Southern Implants, Irene, South Africa) were invited for a clinical examination. Variables collected were surgical and prosthetic protocol, implant dimension and smoking habits. Peri-implant bone level was determined on peri-apical radiographs and compared to baseline, being implant insertion. Results: 98 implants had been placed in 89 patients. One implant had failed. Thirty eight patients representing 47 implants (maxilla 26, mandible 21) were available for clinical examination. Mean bone loss was 0.38 mm (SD 0.48; range - 0.50 – 1.95) after a mean follow-up of 20 months (range 12 - 35). Implant success was 97.9%. Around 30 implants, a bone substitute was used to fill the residual space, but this did not affect the bone loss outcome. Bone loss was only significantly different between maxilla and mandible (0.48 mm vs. 0.27 mm) and between the 8 and 9 mm diameter implants (0.23 mm vs. 0.55 mm). A full papilla was present at 71% of the interproximal sites and irrespective of bone loss. Conclusions: The Max® implant demonstrated good primary stability, when placed in molar extraction sockets, with limited bone loss over time.
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
year
type
journalArticle (original)
publication status
published
subject
keyword
single-tooth dental implants, implant-supported dental prosthesis, endosseous dental, dental implants, implantation, tooth socket, grafting, bone.
journal title
JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL RESEARCH
J. Oral Maxillofacial Res.
volume
2
issue
3
article_number
e1
pages
11 pages
ISSN
2029-283X
DOI
10.5037/jomr.2011.2301
language
English
UGent publication?
yes
classification
A2
copyright statement
I have retained and own the full copyright for this publication
id
1976114
handle
http://hdl.handle.net/1854/LU-1976114
date created
2011-12-29 16:36:33
date last changed
2012-01-04 16:38:42
@article{1976114,
  abstract     = {Objectives: Implant placement in molar extraction sockets can be difficult due to complex multi-root anatomy and the lack of predictable primary stability. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of an 8 - 9 mm diameter tapered implant, designed to be placed in molar extraction sockets.
Material and methods: Patients treated at least 1 year before with a Max{\textregistered} implant (Southern Implants, Irene, South Africa) were invited for a clinical examination. Variables collected were surgical and prosthetic protocol, implant dimension and smoking habits. Peri-implant bone level was determined on peri-apical radiographs and compared to baseline, being implant insertion.
Results: 98 implants had been placed in 89 patients. One implant had failed. Thirty eight patients representing 47 implants (maxilla 26, mandible 21) were available for clinical examination. Mean bone loss was 0.38 mm (SD 0.48; range - 0.50 -- 1.95) after a mean follow-up of 20 months (range 12 - 35). Implant success was 97.9\%. Around 30 implants, a bone substitute was used to fill the residual space, but this did not affect the bone loss outcome. Bone loss was only significantly different between maxilla and mandible (0.48 mm vs. 0.27 mm) and between the 8 and 9 mm diameter implants (0.23 mm vs. 0.55 mm). A full papilla was present at 71\% of the interproximal sites and irrespective of bone loss.
Conclusions: The Max{\textregistered} implant demonstrated good primary stability, when placed in molar extraction sockets, with limited bone loss over time.},
  articleno    = {e1},
  author       = {Vandeweghe, Stefan and Hattingh, Andr{\'e} and Wennerberg, Ann and De Bruyn, Hugo},
  issn         = {2029-283X},
  journal      = {JOURNAL OF ORAL \& MAXILLOFACIAL RESEARCH},
  keyword      = {single-tooth dental implants,implant-supported dental prosthesis,endosseous dental,dental implants,implantation,tooth socket,grafting,bone.},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {3},
  pages        = {11},
  title        = {Surgical protocol and short-term clinical outcome of immediate placement in molar extraction sockets using a wide body implant},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.5037/jomr.2011.2301},
  volume       = {2},
  year         = {2011},
}

Chicago
Vandeweghe, Stefan, André Hattingh, Ann Wennerberg, and Hugo De Bruyn. 2011. “Surgical Protocol and Short-term Clinical Outcome of Immediate Placement in Molar Extraction Sockets Using a Wide Body Implant.” Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Research 2 (3).
APA
Vandeweghe, S., Hattingh, A., Wennerberg, A., & De Bruyn, H. (2011). Surgical protocol and short-term clinical outcome of immediate placement in molar extraction sockets using a wide body implant. JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL RESEARCH, 2(3).
Vancouver
1.
Vandeweghe S, Hattingh A, Wennerberg A, De Bruyn H. Surgical protocol and short-term clinical outcome of immediate placement in molar extraction sockets using a wide body implant. JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL RESEARCH. 2011;2(3).
MLA
Vandeweghe, Stefan, André Hattingh, Ann Wennerberg, et al. “Surgical Protocol and Short-term Clinical Outcome of Immediate Placement in Molar Extraction Sockets Using a Wide Body Implant.” JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL RESEARCH 2.3 (2011): n. pag. Print.