Introduction: Alveolar bone resorption is a natural process in dental extractions. This is due to various factors, including those resulting in the extraction itself. Independently of the reason, however, an extraction is always followed by alveolar bone loss. Placement of implants in reduced bone mass may present a clinical challenge that might require multiple surgical visits to increase bone mass. The use of post-extraction dental implants may be a valid treatment alternative that reduces clinical treatment time and ensures success. The purpose of this article is a review of available literature on post-extraction implants in order to present the advantages and disadvantages of the technique and to check its validity and effectiveness. It also aims to evaluate some technical aspects that may have an effect on the final result. Materials and methods: The literature review was conducted using a Medline search from 1987 to 2011. The keywords used were: osseointegrated implants, dental implants, GBR, immediate implants, bone resorption. Results: With the use of post-extraction technique have been reported many advantages such as reduction of surgical sessions and treatment time, with consequent reduction of the symptomatology of post-operative and overall costs, the prevention of the initial bone loss, which prevents the implant placement adequate length and diameter, the largest percentage of bone-implant contact, through the repair process of fresh socket, and better preservation of hard and soft tissues, with better cosmetic results. However it must consider, also disadvantages, such as greater difficulty in obtaining adequate primary stability and excellent primary closure of soft tissue. Conclusions: Available studies strongly support the use of post-extraction implants in many circumstances. According to the literature under examination can make the following conclusions: the success rate of the post-extraction implants is equal to that of delayed implants, in the defects less than 2 mm are not necessary nor membranes or fillers, in the defects greater than 2 mm the use of membrane and fillers increase the contact surface of the bone-implant, periodontal disease and the apical lesions are not a contraindication, is recommended to use a rough implant surface, the treatment in aesthetic areas needs further studies.

Immediate post-extraction implants: a review of literature

TRAINI, TONINO;
2012-01-01

Abstract

Introduction: Alveolar bone resorption is a natural process in dental extractions. This is due to various factors, including those resulting in the extraction itself. Independently of the reason, however, an extraction is always followed by alveolar bone loss. Placement of implants in reduced bone mass may present a clinical challenge that might require multiple surgical visits to increase bone mass. The use of post-extraction dental implants may be a valid treatment alternative that reduces clinical treatment time and ensures success. The purpose of this article is a review of available literature on post-extraction implants in order to present the advantages and disadvantages of the technique and to check its validity and effectiveness. It also aims to evaluate some technical aspects that may have an effect on the final result. Materials and methods: The literature review was conducted using a Medline search from 1987 to 2011. The keywords used were: osseointegrated implants, dental implants, GBR, immediate implants, bone resorption. Results: With the use of post-extraction technique have been reported many advantages such as reduction of surgical sessions and treatment time, with consequent reduction of the symptomatology of post-operative and overall costs, the prevention of the initial bone loss, which prevents the implant placement adequate length and diameter, the largest percentage of bone-implant contact, through the repair process of fresh socket, and better preservation of hard and soft tissues, with better cosmetic results. However it must consider, also disadvantages, such as greater difficulty in obtaining adequate primary stability and excellent primary closure of soft tissue. Conclusions: Available studies strongly support the use of post-extraction implants in many circumstances. According to the literature under examination can make the following conclusions: the success rate of the post-extraction implants is equal to that of delayed implants, in the defects less than 2 mm are not necessary nor membranes or fillers, in the defects greater than 2 mm the use of membrane and fillers increase the contact surface of the bone-implant, periodontal disease and the apical lesions are not a contraindication, is recommended to use a rough implant surface, the treatment in aesthetic areas needs further studies.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11564/471328
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact