Feasibility and needs for simultaneous or staged bone augmentation to place prosthetically guided dental implants after extraction or exfoliation of first molars due to severe periodontitis
- PMID: 32652610
- DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.13344
Feasibility and needs for simultaneous or staged bone augmentation to place prosthetically guided dental implants after extraction or exfoliation of first molars due to severe periodontitis
Abstract
Background: The aim of this study was to retrospectively assess bone volumes, healed ridge topography and possibility to plan prosthetically guided implants (PGI) at least 6 months after extraction or exfoliation of first molars as a consequence of terminal periodontitis (EEFMP).
Materials and methods: 45 subjects with stage III-IV periodontitis providing 74 extraction sites (maxillary = 51 and mandibular = 23) were included. The degree of residual periodontal support on each root was assessed by combining periodontal and radiographic data. Digital planning of PGI with 4.8/4.1 mm diameter, 8 mm long, root-form dental implant and need for bone augmentation (BA) were performed using CBCT with a radiographic stent. Possibility of standard implant placement (STANDARD) and need for simultaneous or staged BA were assessed.
Results: Planning PGI placement was possible in all cases. For a 4.8 mm diameter implant, STANDARD was possible in 37.8% of the sites, 33.8% required BA at the time of implant placement, and 28.4% required staged BA before PGI. The use of 4.1 mm rather than 4.8 mm diameter implant allowed STANDARD in an additional 8.1% of cases that originally required simultaneous BA/osteotome sinus floor elevation (OSFE). The level of periodontal bone loss did not predict the complexity of implant placement, but significant differences were observed comparing maxillary with mandibular sites.
Conclusion: PGI planning at sites with first molar loss due to terminal periodontitis is possible but poses great challenge to rehabilitation, often requiring advanced augmentation procedures and sinus augmentation.
Keywords: Severe periodontitis; bone augmentation; dental implant; masticatory function; molar extraction; prosthetically driven implant placement; stage III periodontitis; stage IV periodontitis.
© 2020 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
References
REFERENCES
-
- Avila-Ortiz, G., Chambrone, L., & Vignoletti, F. (2019). Effect of alveolar ridge preservation interventions following tooth extraction: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 46(Suppl 21), 195-223.
-
- Avila-Ortiz, G., Elangovan, S., Kramer, K. W., Blanchette, D., & Dawson, D. V. (2014). Effect of alveolar ridge preservation after tooth extraction: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Dental Research, 93, 950-958.
-
- Baelum, V., & Ellegaard, B. (2004). Implant survival in periodontally compromised patients. Journal of Periodontology, 75, 1404-1412.
-
- Basten, C. H., & Kois, J. C. (1996). The use of barium sulfate for implant templates. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 76, 451-454.
-
- Chan, D., Pelekos, G., Ho, D., Cortellini, P., & Tonetti, M. S. (2019). The depth of the implant mucosal tunnel modifies the development and resolution of experimental peri-implant mucositis: A case-control study. Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 46, 248-255. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.13066
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources