[On the question of dental implantation follow-up and results assessment in patients with risk factors]

[Possibilities and prospects for experimental and clinical instrumentation techniques for determining the primary stability of dental implants in comparative analysis]

The high primary stability of dental implants provides a favorable prognosis for orthopedic treatment with implant-supported structures. The importance of assessing the stability and the bone tissue surrounding the implant as a whole is due to the fact that the process of osseointegration is a structural and functional connection between the bone and the loaded surface of the implant. Determination of the dynamics of the stability of dental implants allows timely monitoring of unpredictable changes at the stages of osseointegration and remodeling of bone tissue around the implant. Currently, in addition to clinical and radiation diagnostic methods, there are generally recognized by clinicians frequency resonance analysis and periotestometry. However, there are some scientific discrepancies indicating the lack of objectivity of these methods and the impossibility of their full-fledged application without the support of radiation and clinical diagnostic methods. In addition to these methods, there are many experimental and less common methods in clinical practice for assessing the primary stability of implants, but with reasonable objectivity. Thus, the reasons are given that for a full assessment of the relationship between the efforts exerted on implants and their movements in the space of bone tissue, devices are needed that reflect the stability and density of the contact of the implant with bone tissue in physical quantities. In particular, methods based on lasers, sound, quantitative ultrasound, and others have found experimental practical application. The ultrasound method of assessing the primary stability of the implant is estimated as the most promising, since it allows you to demonstrate the results of studies in certain physical quantities, as well as to compare these results with histomorphological indicators of osseointegration of dental implants.