İmmediat implant yerleştirme ve yükleme protokolleri

Year 2024, , 297 - 303, 01.07.2024

Aslı Elif Köroğlu , Fehmi Gönüldaş , Dogan Derya Oztas

https://doi.org/10.18663/tjcl.1428688

Abstract

İmmediat implant yerleştirme ve yükleme protokolünün; sadece tedavi süresini kısaltmakla kalmaması, peri implant mukozayı koruması ve diş çekiminden sonra dokunun mümkün olan en iyi estetik şeklin korunmasıyla hem diş hekimleri hem de hastalar için popüler ve cazip bir tedavi seçeneği haline gelmiştir. İmmediat implant yerleştirme karmaşık bir prosedür olarak kabul edilir ve yalnızca ideal anatomik koşullar mevcut olduğunda deneyimli klinisyenler tarafından gerçekleştirilmelidir.
Soket Koruma Tekniği, sert ve yumuşak doku konturlarının korunmasına yardımcı olmak için dişin kökünün bir kısmını soket içerisinde korumayı amaçlayan minimal invaziv bir cerrahi prosedürdür. Kökün bukkal duvarının soket içerisinde korunmasının; bukkal kemiğin hem dişetinden hem de periodonsiyumdan iki taraflı beslenmesini sağladığı düşünülmektedir.
Güncel yaklaşımlardan biri olan " Socket Sealing Abutment" (SSA) tekniği, kişiye özel bir iyileşme başlığı üretilerek diş çekiminden sonra dişeti profilini korumayı amaçlamaktadır. Bu kişiselleştirilmiş iyileşme başlığı aynı zamanda primer yara kapanmasına izin verir ve soketin içerisindeki alveolar pıhtıyı ve greft materyallerini korur.
İmmediat fonksiyonel yükleme; geçici veya daimi protezin implant yerleştirilmesiyle aynı gün karşıt ark ile oklüzal temas halinde olan bir restorasyon ile yüklenmesidir. İmmediat fonksiyonel olmayan yükleme; geçici protezin implant yerleştirilmesiyle aynı gün karşıt ark ile oklüzal temas halinde olmayan bir restorasyon ile yüklenmesidir. Yapılan çalışmalarda; fonksiyonel olmayan yükleme ve fonksiyonel yükleme protokolleri arasında implant sağkalım oranı ve marjinal kemik kaybı ile ilgili istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark bulunamamıştır.

Keywords

immediate yükleme, Dental implant, immediate yerleştirme

Immedıate ımplant placement and loadıng protocols

Abstract

Immediate implant placement and immediate loading protocol has become popular and appealing treatment option for both dentists and patients. As it does not only reduce treatment time, but also protects the peri-implant tissue and results in the best possible aesthetic outcome of the emergence profile after tooth extraction.
The Socket Shield Technique is minimally invasive surgical procedure that aims to preserve part of the root within the socket to help preserve the hard and soft tissue contours. This technique is thought to provide nutrition of the buccal bone from both the gingiva and the periodontium.
One of the current approaches, the ‘Sealing Socket Abutment’ (SSA) Technique, aims to preserve the gingival profile immediately after tooth extraction by producing a customized healing abutment. This personalized healing abutment also allows for primary wound closure and protects the alveolar clot and graft materials inside the socket.
The immediate functional loading protocol involves placing an implant and loading it with a restoration in occlusal contact with the opposing arch. In contrast, the immediate non-functional loading protocol includes loading the implant with a provisional prosthesis that does not have occlusal contact with the opposing arch.
Studies showed, no statistically significant difference was found in implant survival rate and marginal bone loss between non-functional and functional loading protocols.

Keywords

Dental implant, immediate placement, immediate loading

References

• Al-Omiri MK, Karasneh JA, Lynch E, Lamey PJ, Clifford TJ. Impacts of missing upper anterior teeth on daily living. International Dental Journal 2019;59(3), 127–132.
• van Nimwegen WG, Goené RJ, van Daelen ACL, Stellingsma K, Raghoebar GM, Meijer HJA. Immediate implant placement and provisionalisation in the aesthetic zone. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 2016;43, 745–752.
• Gallucci G, Hamilton A, Zhou W, Buser D, Chen S. Implant placement and loading protocols in partially edentulous patients: A systematic review. Clinical Oral Implants Research 2018;29(Suppl. 16):106–134.
• Slagter KW, Raghoebar GM, Hentenaar DF, Vissink A, Meijer HJ. Immediate placement of single implants with or without immediate provisionalization in the maxillary aesthetic region: A 5-year comparative study. Journal of Clinical Periodontology 2021;48, 272–283.
• Peñarrocha-Diago M, Covani U, Cuadrado L. Atlas of Immediate Dental Implant Loading. Springer Nature, Switzerland; 2019.
• Romanos G. Wound healing in immediately loaded implants. Periodontology 2000 2015;Vol. 68, 153–167.
• Moraschini EV, Barboza P. Success of dental implants in smokers and nonsmokers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery 2016;45: 205–215.
• Al Amri MD, Kellesarian SV, Abduljabbar TS, Al Rifaiy MQ, Al Baker AM, Al-Kheraif AA. Comparison of Peri-Implant Soft Tissue Parameters and Crestal Bone Loss Around Immediately Loaded and Delayed Loaded Implants in Smokers and NonSmokers: 5-Year Follow-Up Results. Journal of Periodontology 2017;88:3-9.
• Misch CE. Dental Implant Prosthetics. St. Louis, Missouri: Mosby; 2005.
• Moraschini EV, Barboza ES, Peixoto GA. The impact of diabetes on dental implant failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery 2016;45:1237–45.
• Al Amri MD, Alfarraj Aldosari AM, Al-Johany SS. Comparison of clinical and radiographic status around immediately loaded versus conventional loaded implants placed in patients with type 2 diabetes: 12- and 24-month follow-up results. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 2017;44:220–8.
• Buser D, Chappuis V, Belser UC, Chen S. Implant placement postextraction in esthetic single toothsites: when immediate, when early, when late? Periodontology 2000 2017; Vol. 73, 84–102.
• Bäumer D, Zuhr O, Rebele S, Schneider D, Schupbach P, Hürzeler M. The socket-shield technique:First histological, clinical, and volumetrical observations after separation of the buccal tooth segment – A pilot study. Clinical Implant Dental Related Restorations 2015;17:71–82.
• Mitsias ME, Siormpas KD, Kotsakis GA, Ganz SD, Mangano C, Iezzi G. The root membrane technique: Human histologic evidence after five years of function. Biomed Research International 2017;7269467.
• Kumar PR, Kher U. Shield the socket: Procedure, case report and classification. Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology 2018;May-Jun;22(3):266-272.
• Chokaree P, Poovarodom P, Chaijareenont P, Yavirach A, Rungsiyakull P. Biomaterials and Clinical Applications of Customized Healing Abutment—A Narrative Review. Journal of Functional Biomaterials 2022;13, 291.
• Finelle G, Sanz-Martín I, Knafo B, Figué M, Popelut A. DigitalizedCAD/CAM protocol for the fabrication of customized sealing sockethealing abutments in immediate implants in molar sites. International Journal of Computerized Dentistry 2019;22(2):187-204.
• Lilet R, Desiron M, Finelle G, Lecloux G, Seidel L, Lambert F. Immediate implant placement combining socket seal abutment and peri-implant socket filling: A prospective case series. Clinical Oral Implants Research 2022;33:33–44.
• Flanagan D, Fisher A, Ciardiello C, Moreno V, Pierce D, Uvalic A et al. Theoretical Iteration for Predicting the Feasibility for Immediate Functional Dental Implant Loading. Journal of Oral Implantology 2021;Vol. XLVII, No. Four.
• Chrcanovic BR, Albrektsson T, Wennerberg A. Immediate nonfunctional versus immediate functional loading and dental implant failure rates: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Dentistry 2014;42,1052 – 1059. Singh MGJP, Gupta CAK, Dhiman CRK, Roy Chowdhury CSK. Comparative study of immediate functional loading and immediate non-functional loading of monocortical implants. Medical Journal Armed Forces India 2015;71, S333-339.
• Benic GI, Mir-Mari J, Hämmerle CHF. Loading Protocols for Single-Implant Crowns: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Internatonal Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants 2014;29(Suppl):222–238.
• Buser D, Janne SF, Wittneben JG, Brägger U, Ramseier CA, Salvi GE. 10-year survival and success rates of 511 titanium implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface: A retrospective study in 303 partially edentulous patients. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research 2012;14(6), 839–851.
• Wittneben JG, Molinero-Mourelle P, Hamilton A, Alnasser M, Obermaier B, Morton D et al . Clinical performance of immediately placed and immediately loaded single implants in the esthetic zone: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Oral Implants Research 2023;34(Suppl. 26):266–303.
• Chen ST, Buser D. Esthetic outcomes following immediate and early implant placement in the anterior maxilla–a systematic review. The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants 2014;29(Suppl), 186–215.
• Garcia-Sanchez R, Dopico J, Kalemaj Z, Buti J, Pardo Zamora G, Mardas N. Comparison of clinical outcomes of immediate versus delayed placement of dental implants: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Oral Implants Research 2022;33(3), 231–277.
• Aksoy MC, Kocer G, Kücükesmen HC, Eroglu E, Sentürk MF. Distribution and pattern of implant therapy in a part of the Turkish population. JPak Med Assoc 2016; Vol.66, No.10.
• Ribeiro AKC, Costa RTF, Vasconcelos BCE, Moraes SLD, Carreiro AFP, Pellizzer EP. Patient-reported outcome measures and prosthetic events in implant-supported mandibular overdenture patients after immediate versus delayed loading: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 2022;0022-3913.
• Huynh-Ba G, Oates TW, Williams MAH. Immediate loading vs. early/conventional loading of immediately placed implants in partially edentulous patients from the patients’ perspective: A systematic review. Clinical Oral Implants Research 2018;29(Suppl. 16):255–269.
• Morton D, Wismeijer D, Chen S, Hamilton A, Wittneben J, Casentini P et al. Group 5 ITI Consensus Report: Implant placement and loading protocols. Clinical Oral Implants Research 2023;34(Suppl. 26):349–356.