Journals / Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi / 2015 / Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 3

E

İMMEDİYAT İMPLANTASYONDA KEMİK KAYBI VE REJENERATİF YÖNTEMLER BONE LOSS AND REGENERATIVE METHODS IN IMMEDIATE IMPLANTATION

Pages
175–180
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The main advantages of the immediate approach are reduced overall treatment time and the number of surgical procedures.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Placement of immediate implants into fresh extraction sockets have a lot of advantages to both patients and clinicians.
📊
Key Findings & Data:However, there are also some disadvantages of this approach: extraction socket infection leading to an increased risk of implant lost, technique sensitive extra surgery, difficulty in achieving ideal location and initial stabilization, the increased risk of gingival recession and unpredictable future bone healing results after tooth extraction.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The main advantages of the immediate approach are reduced overall treatment time and the number of surgical procedures.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Placement of immediate implants into fresh extraction sockets have a lot of advantages to both patients and clinicians. The main advantages of the immediate approach are reduced overall treatment time and the number of surgical procedures. In addition, this method provides an optimal implant position and angulation that results in a esthetic outcome. However, there are also some disadvantages of this approach: extraction socket infection leading to an increased risk of implant lost, technique sensitive extra surgery, difficulty in achieving ideal location and initial stabilization, the increased risk of gingival recession and unpredictable future bone healing results after tooth extraction. The aim of the present review is to assess the factors affecting success in immediate implantation procedure to get more successful and aesthetic results.

Özet

Diş çekiminden hemen sonra çekim boşluklarına implantların immediyat olarak yerleştirilmesinin hem hastalar hem de hekimler açısından bir çok avantajının olduğu ortaya konmuştur. Toplam tedavi süresinin ve cerrahi işlem sayısının azaltılmasının yanında implantın doğru pozisyon ve açı ile yerleştirilmesi sonucu ideal estetik sonuç elde edilmesi bu yöntemin önemli avantajlarıdır. Ancak, bu tedavi seçeneğinin dezavantajları da bulunmaktadır. Bunlar; çekim boşluğunun enfekte olmasıyla implantın kaybedilme riskinin artması, artı cerrahiler gerektirebilen hassas bir teknik olması, kemik morfolojisinin ideal yerleşim ve primer stabilizasyon açısından problem oluşturabilmesi, dişeti çekilmesi riskinin artması ve çekim sonrası kemiğin iyileşmesi sırasında ortaya çıkabilecek sonuçların tahmin edilememesi olarak belirtilmiştir. Bu derlemenin amacı daha başarılı ve daha estetik sonuçlar almak için immediyat implantasyon işlemlerinde başarıya etki eden faktörleri değerlendirmektir.

🔖

Cite This Article

AYDINBELGE, M., ÇİFCİBAŞI², E., KOYUNCUOĞLU¹, C. Z., PAMUK¹, F., TUNALI³, M. (2022). E. Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 3, 175–180. https://ajindex.com/articles/590142

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Brånemark PI, Hansson BO, Adell R, et al.Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10-year period. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Suppl 1977;16:1-132
  2. Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, et al. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg 1981; 10: 387-416
  3. Brånemark PI. Introduction to osseointegration. İçinde: Brånemark PI, Zarb G, Albrektsson T, editor. Tissue-integrated prostheses. Osseointegration in clinical dentistry. Chicago, Berlin: Quintessence Publishing Co., 1985; pp. 11- 76
  4. Schulte W, Heimke G. The Tübingen immediate implant. Die Quintessenz 1976; 27: 17-23
  5. Barzilay I. Immediate implants: their current status. Int J Prosthodont 1993; 6: 169-175
  6. Schwartz-Arad D, Chaushu G. The ways and wherefores of immediate placement of implants into fresh extraction sites: a literature review. J Periodontol 1997; 68: 915-923
  7. Bhola M, Neely AL, Kolhatkar S. Immediate Implant Placement: Clinical Decisions, Advantages, and Disadvantages. J Prosthodont 2008; 17: 576-581
  8. Werbitt MJ, Goldberg PV. The immediate implant: bone preservation and bone regeneration. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1992; 12: 206-217
  9. Watzek G, Haider R, Mensdorff-Pouilly N, et al.Immediate and delayed implantation for complete restoration of the jaw following extraction of all residual teeth: a retrospective study comparing different types of serial immediate implantation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995; 10: 561-567
  10. Paolantonio M, Dolci M, Scarano A, et al.Immediate implantation in fresh extraction sockets. A controlled clinical and histological study in man. J Periodontol 2001; 72: 1560-1571
  11. Lindeboom JA, Tjiook Y, Kroon FH. Immediate placement of implants in periapical infected sites: a prospective randomized study in 50 patients. Oral Sur Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006; 101: 705-710
  12. Yukna RA. Clinical comparison of hydroxyapatitecoated titanium dental implants placed in fresh extraction sockets and healed sites. J Periodontol 1991; 62: 468-472
  13. Schwartz-Arad D, Chaushu G. Placement of implants into fresh extraction sites: 4 to 7 years retrospective evaluation of 95 immediate implants. J Periodontol 1997; 68: 1110-1116
  14. Covani U, Crespi R, Cornelini R, et al. Immediate implants supporting single crown restoration: a 4- year prospective study. J Periodontol 2004; 75: 982-988
  15. Botticelli D, Renzi A, Lindhe J, et al. Implan