Maintenance of class III trifurcated molars versus implant placement in regenerated extraction sockets: long-term results of 2 cases

Compromised Teeth Preserve or Extract: A Review of the Literature

Multiple systems and associated factors have been described in the literature to assess the prognosis of teeth with periodontal disease. Nowadays there is a tendency among clinicians to consider implants as the best solution after tooth extraction, in cases of teeth with a questionable prognosis. However, the value of the natural tooth must be considered, as the proprioception of the periodontal ligament is preserved, and it adapts to stress during functional loads. We first review the literature focusing on analyzing the factors that should guide decision-making to maintain or extract a tooth with a compromised periodontium. Then, we propose a schematic diagram of prognostic indicators to reflect the main factors to consider and the survival rate that each one represents when preserving or extracting a tooth.

Implant Treatment with 12-Year Follow-Up in a Patient with Severe Chronic Periodontitis: A Case Report and Literature Review

Tooth loss among adults is associated with progressive periodontitis. Implant prosthetic treatment has long been utilized in periodontal patients. Even when the implants are applied, ongoing management of periodontal disease and control of inflammation is necessary to maintain a healthy oral cavity. Lack of appropriate periodontal treatment can result in recurrence of periodontal disease during a maintenance period; loss of the supportive capacity of the periodontal tissues will increase the susceptibility of residual teeth to traumatic force. For this reason, it is worthwhile to improve oral function by applying implants as a fixed device. Here, we report that implant treatment in a patient with generalized severe chronic periodontitis helped maintain the periodontal and peri-implant tissue for a long term. We propose that initial periodontal treatment and ongoing supportive therapy can help maintain implants in patients with severe periodontitis. In addition, we reviewed case reports in the English literature so far.

Longitudinal implant stability measurements based on resonance frequency analysis after placement in healed or regenerated bone

Primary stability is an indicator of subsequent osseointegration of dental implants. However, few studies have compared the implant stability among anatomical regions and bone types; thus, not enough data exist regarding the stability of implants placed in regenerated bone (RB). The present study evaluated primary and long-term stability of implants placed in RB and non-regenerated healed bone (HB). A total of 216 screw cylinder implants were placed in 216 patients (98 in HB and 118 in RB, 6 [RB6, N = 68] or 12 [RB12, N = 50] months after tooth extraction). Implant stability was evaluated using resonance frequency analysis (RFA) measured at the time of implant placement (E1), at the time of loading (4 months after placement, E2), and 4 months after loading (E3). Various clinically relevant measurements were obtained, such as implant diameter, length, and location, as well as bone quality. At E1, implant location, bone quality, and experimental group significantly affected implant stability (all at P < .05). At E2, implant location, diameter, length, and experimental group significantly affected implant stability (all at P < .05). At E3, bone quality, implant diameter, length, and experimental group significantly affected implant stability (all at P < .01). Stability for the RB12 group was significantly higher than all other corresponding values; further, the values did not change significantly over time. For the HB and RB6 groups, stability was significantly higher at E2 than at E1 (P < .001) and was no different between E2 and E3. Implant location, length, and experimental group were associated with these differences (all at P < .05). Compared with HB and RB6, higher implant stability may be achieved in regenerated bone 12 months post-extraction (RB12). This stability was achieved at E1 and maintained for at least 8 months. Variables such as implant length, diameter, and bone quality affected the stability differently over time. Implant stability varied in different anatomic regions and with regard to different healing processes in the bone.