Rajvir Malik1, Rachna Garg, D K Suresh, Shalu Chandna. 1. Department of Periodontology and Implantology, Dayan and Anglo Vedic (Centanary) Dental College and Hospital, Yamuna Nagar, Haryana, India. rajvirmalik@yahoo.com
Abstract
AIM: The purpose of this article is to illustrate the relationship of bone quality and the prognosis of dental implant. BACKGROUND: Reported success rates for dental implants are high. Thus, an implant-supported restoration offers a predictable treatment for tooth replacement. Nevertheless, failures that mandate immediate implant removal do occur. CASE DESCRIPTION: A case involving a 40-year-old male patient who had a missing mandibular left first molar is reported. A mucoperiosteal flap was made using interdental and crevicular incisions. The osteotomy was performed starting with the pilot drill, then the depth of the osteotomy was assessed using the shoulder depth gauge. The site was gradually enlarged using reamers with progressively increasing diameters. The implant (Bicon's Nano Tite™) was then placed. However, three months later at the second stage surgery, the implant was found to be clinically mobile. The surgical site selected in this case had fine trabeculated bone with thin cortical plates (D4 bone) that apparently contributed to the failure of dental implant. SUMMARY: Implant therapy has become common practice and will continue to increase in popularity. This also implies that dental professionals will have to learn more how to deal with implant failure and related complications. Why an implant does not integrate could have a multifactorial etiology. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The type and quality of bone available to support a dental implant are very important, so attention should be directed to all the factors responsible for the success or failure of a dental implant. In cases involving D4 bone, one must consider other treatment modalities for replacement of a missing tooth or use caution in the placement of the implants, especially in the high-load-bearing molar areas.
AIM: The purpose of this article is to illustrate the relationship of bone quality and the prognosis of dental implant. BACKGROUND: Reported success rates for dental implants are high. Thus, an implant-supported restoration offers a predictable treatment for tooth replacement. Nevertheless, failures that mandate immediate implant removal do occur. CASE DESCRIPTION: A case involving a 40-year-old male patient who had a missing mandibular left first molar is reported. A mucoperiosteal flap was made using interdental and crevicular incisions. The osteotomy was performed starting with the pilot drill, then the depth of the osteotomy was assessed using the shoulder depth gauge. The site was gradually enlarged using reamers with progressively increasing diameters. The implant (Bicon's Nano Tite™) was then placed. However, three months later at the second stage surgery, the implant was found to be clinically mobile. The surgical site selected in this case had fine trabeculated bone with thin cortical plates (D4 bone) that apparently contributed to the failure of dental implant. SUMMARY: Implant therapy has become common practice and will continue to increase in popularity. This also implies that dental professionals will have to learn more how to deal with implant failure and related complications. Why an implant does not integrate could have a multifactorial etiology. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The type and quality of bone available to support a dental implant are very important, so attention should be directed to all the factors responsible for the success or failure of a dental implant. In cases involving D4 bone, one must consider other treatment modalities for replacement of a missing tooth or use caution in the placement of the implants, especially in the high-load-bearing molar areas.