L’objectif de cette recherche est d’évaluer rétrospectivement un implant innovant et une conception prothétique en appliquant les critères suivants:
1. taux de réussite des implants,
2. perte osseuse et stabilité du niveau osseux au niveau du col de l’implant (La connexion conique conique Morse s’est avérée être la connexion la plus stable à l’heure actuelle. Par conséquent, certains systèmes d’implants ont déjà commencé à la mettre en œuvre, et ils ont prouvé la stabilité du niveau osseux grâce à cette connexion (Bicon, Ankylos),
3. esthétique en termes de score esthétique,
4. épaisseur de la gencive à 3 mm du bord gingival ,
5. largeur de la gencive kératinisée autour des implants,
6. hauteur de la gencive autour des implants
L’étude comprend les données de 137 patients avec 608 implants (C-Tech, Bologne, Italie).
References
1. Rudolf Fürhauser, Dionisie Florescu, Thomas Benesch, Robert Haas, Georg Mailath and Georg Watzek: Evaluation of soft tissue around single-tooth implant crowns: the pink esthetic score. Clinical Oral Implants Research, Volume 16, Issue 6, pages 639-644, December 2005
2. Shalabi MM, Gortemaker A, Van‘t Hof MA, Jansen JA, Creugers NH: Implant surface roughness and bone healing: a systematic review. J Dent Res 2006 Jul;85(7):670
3. K Anselme, A Ponche, and M Bigerelle: Relative influence of surface topography and surface chemistry on cell response to bone implant materials. Part 2: biological aspects. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part H: J Engineering in Med December 2010,Vol.224, no.12 1487-1507. DOI:10.1243/09544119JEIM901
4. Daniel Sartorelli Marques de Castro, Maria Angelica Rehder de Araujo, Cesar Augusto Magalhães Benfatti, Carlos dos Reis Pereira de Araujo, Adriano Piattelli, Vittoria Perrotti, and Giovanna Lezzi: Comparative Histological and Histomorphometrical Evaluation of Marginal Bone Resorption Around External Hexagon and Morse Cone Implants: An Experimental Study in Dogs. Impl Dent, Volume 23, Number 3
5. K Anselme, A Ponche, and M Bigerelle: Relative influence of surface topography and surface chemistry on cell response to bone implant materials. Part 2: biological aspects. The manuscript was received on 19 July 2010 and was accepted after revision for publication on 12 August 2010,Vol.224, no.12 1487-1507. DOI:10.1243/09544119JEIM901
6. Shen WL, Chen CS, Hsu ML: Influence of implant collar design on stress and strain distribution in the crestal compact bone: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010 Sep-Oct;25(5):901-10
7. Xavier Vela-Nebot, Xavier Rodríguez-Ciurana, Carlos Rodado-Alonso, and Maribel Segalà-Torres,: Benefits of an Implant Platform Modification Technique to Reduce Crestal Bone Resorption. Impl Dent, Volume 15, Number 3 (2006) 313-318
8. Yun-Chi Wang Joseph Y. K., Kan Kitichai Rungcharassaeng, Phillip Roe, Jaime L. Lozada: Marginal bone response of implants with platform switching and non-platform switching abutments in posterior healed sites: a 1-year prospective study. Clin Oral Impl Res 0,2014, 1-8
9. Hurzeler M, Fickl S, Zuhr O, Wachtel HC: Peri-implant bone level around implants with platform-switched abutments: preliminary data from a prospective study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg (2007) Jul; 65(7 Suppl 1):33-9
10. Frederic Hermann, Henriette Lerner, and Ady Palti: Factors Influencing the Preservation of the Periimplant Marginal Bone. Impl Dent, Volume 16, NUMBER 2 (2007) 165-175
11. de Oliveira RR, Novaes AB Jr, Taba M Jr, Papalexiou V, Muglia VA: Bone remodeling adjacent to Morse cone-connection implants with platform switch: a fluorescence study in the dog mandible. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants (2009) Mar-Apr;24(2):257-66
12. Almeida EO, Freitas AC Jr, Bonfante EA, Marotta L, Silva NR, Coelho PG. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants: Mechanical testing of implant-supported anterior crowns with different implant/abutment connections. (2013) Jan-Feb;28(1):103-8. doi: 10.11607/jomi.2443
13. Sannino G, Barlattani A.: Mechanical evaluation of an implant-abutment self-locking taper connection: finite element analysis and experimental tests. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2013 Jan-Feb;28(1):e17-26. doi:10.11607/jomi.2058
14. Tara B. Taiyeb-Ali, Chooi Gait Toh, Chong Huat Siar: Influence of Abutment Design on Clinical Status of Peri-Implant Tissues. Impl Dent, Volume 18, Number 5 (2009) 438-446
15. Tomas Linkevicius, Peteris Apse, Simonas Grybauskas, and Algirdas Puisys: Influence of Thin Mucosal Tissues on Crestal Bone Stability Around Implants With Platform Switching: A 1-year Pilot Study. JOMS (2010)
16. Su H, Gonzalez-Martin O, Weisgold A, Lee E: Considerations of implant abutment and crown contour: critical contour and subcritical contour. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent (2010) Aug;30(4):335-43
17. M Redemagni, S Cremonesi, G Garlini: Soft tissue stability with immediate implants and concave abutments. Eur J Esthet Dent, Volume 4, Number 4 (2009)
18. Richard J. Lazzara, Tiziano Testori, Alan Meltzer, Craig Misch, Stephan Porter, Robert del Castillo, Ronnie J. Goené: IMMEDIATE OCCLUSAL LOADING™ (IOL™) OF DENTAL IMPLANTS: Predictable Results Through DIEM™ Guidelines Supplement top a Montage Media publication.
