REHABILITATION OF PATIENTS WITH PERIODONTALLY-AFFECTED BONE SUPPORT BY THE MINI-INVASIVE APPLICATION OF DENTAL IMPLANTS

• Main Authors: Diana RADU-GHICA, Ioana RUDNIC, Silvia MÂRŢU
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Academy of Romanian Scientists 2013-03-01
• Series: International Journal of Medical Dentistry
• Subjects: endo-bone implants; osteointegration; periodontally-affected bone support
• Online Access: http://www.ijmd.ro/articole/294_Pagini%2065-70%20Ghica%20IJMD%201-2013.pdf

Introduction. Nowadays, oral implantology came to represent an indispensable part of modern stomatology. Obtention and maintenance of implants’ osteointegration, alongwith “conservation” of the bone level of the periimplantary alveolar apophyies crest are especially important in implantological treatments. Scope and objectives Scope of the study: to optimize the rehabilitation process in patients with periodontally-afected bone support by minimum invasive application of dental endo-oseous implants. Materials and method. The study was developed on 112 persons – 48 men and 64 women, with ages between 22 and 71 years, divided into 2 groups, as follows: the former (control) group included 54 persons, in whom the Alpha-BIO, ADIN and MIS implants had been applied by the standard method, namely flap surgery, while the latter (experimental) group was formed of 58 patients, whose implants had been inserted without using flaps. The modifications produced at the level of the periimplantary cortical bone, along the healing stage, in the patients of both groups, prior and post implant, were appreciated by the difference between the distance from the apex of the implant up to the alveolar crest, determined on the first dental panoramic X-ray-OPG1 immediately after the surgery, and on the second dental panoramic X-ray-OPG2, prior to their discovery. Results. The OPG measurements made on the mandible demonstrated that resorption of the periimplantary cortical bone in the control group is more frequently occurring and more significant, varying between 0.00 and –2.82 mm. In the anterior part of the implants, its mean value is of –0.75 ± 0.09 while, in the posterior one – of –0.59 ± 0.09. In the experimental group, the modifications produced in the periimplantary cortical bone were also varying – namely, between +0.81 (aposition) and –1.39. In the anterior part of the implants, the mean value of the resorption degree is of –0.22 ± 0.08 mm while, in the posterior one, of –0.14 ± 0.07mm. Conclusions. The osteointegration ratio of the implants inserted in two surgical times, without flaps’ departure (97.92%), is not different from that of osteointegration in cases of their installation with flaps’ departure (98.05%). The secondary stability of the installed implants, without the creation of mucoperiostal flaps, even if insignificant (p > 0.05), exceeds the one of the implants installed by standard methods. Consequently, implants’ osteointegration may be successfully obtained even by their insertion through a mini-invasive method – involving two surgical times, with no departure of the mucoperiostal flaps.