Tags: Quarterly Essay OnlineBest Way To Start A Essay About YourselfWork Safety CoursePure Water Business PlanThesis On Environmental DegradationValue Of A Human Life Essay
Abstract: Replace lost teeth by artificial prosthetic has been a preoccupation since the dawn of human time.
As marginal bone loss is faster before loading implants with prosthetic restorations than after loading, it is advisable to consider early loading if the necessary clinical conditions are met. Retrospective multicenter evaluation of tapered implant with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface at 1 to 4 years of function.
Rasouli Ghahroudi AAR, Talaeepour AR, Mesgarzadeh A Rokn AR, Khorsand A, Mesgarzadeh NN, Kharazi Fard MJ. Degidi M, Piatelli A, Shibli JA, Perrotti V, Iezzi G.
Although the frequency of this type of failure for a dental implant is much smaller than those caused by the peri-implantitis, a detailed study of broken implants can explain possible causes. Dorogoy, Mechanical assessment of grit blasting surface treatments of dental implants, Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials.
The use of scanning electron microscopy (SEM) in the study of the cleave areas explain the production mechanism of cleavages, starting from micro-fissures in the alloy used for the production of dental implants.
Marginal bone loss after loading with prosthetic restorations was 11 times lower for Type I implants and 4 times lower for Type II implants.
Conclusions: Implants with conical implant-abutment connection are significantly more favourable to osseointegration than those with internal hexagonal connection. Material and methods: Marginal bone loss was assessed around implants with two different types of implant-abutment connection: with conical (Type I) and with internal hexagonal (Type II) in the same patient. The evaluation of marginal bone loss in the studied patient groups was made on the basis of orthopantomographic radiographs.Results: Marginal bone loss around Type I implants was 0.112 mm/month before loading with prosthetic restorations, and 0.010 mm/month after loading, while for Type II implants it reached, respectively 0.123 mm/month and 0.030 mm/month.This was a prospective, open-label, single-arm study in patients requiring implant rehabilitation in single-tooth edentulous area.Ceramic implants (PURE Ceramic Implant, Institut Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland) with a diameter of 4.1 mm were placed following standard procedure and loaded with provisional and final prostheses after 3 and 6 months, respectively.Alternatively, zirconia-based ceramic implants have been developed with similar characteristics of functional strength and osseointegration.Ceramic implants offer advantages in certain settings, e.g. The aim of this study was to investigate the mid-term (36 months) clinical performance of a ceramic monotype implant in single-tooth edentulous area. Zembic, A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) after a mean observation period of at least 5 years. Our purpose is to make a comparative study of five models that is different only by the interaction distance between 0.5 mm and 2 mm spacing two implants, to clarify the mechanical behavior of this interaction distance. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02546.x B. The aim of our work is to study mechanical behavior of the interaction distance between two dental implants, in order to serve as support for a crown, a bridge element or an attachment of the prosthesis.These micro-fissures in weak areas of the implant (anti-rotational corners of the polygons, etc.) could generate a serious risk of cleavage first time when a higher force is applied. We studied the static mechanical behavior of the implant using numerical methods.