Contreras MI, Contreras MG, Nunes TK, Aires RAPC, Bianchini MA

Language: Spanish
References: 13
Page: 249-254
PDF size: 1032.98 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Maxillary resorption inflicts limitations to implant placement when using conventional techniques. The concept of «All-on-Four» uses distally inclined implants in edentulous arches; it improves denture support and increases inter-implant distance, providing thus greater stability in the bone with the help of longer implants. For over two decades, different types of therapies have been developed to rehabilitate atrophic or edentulous arches. Obtained results have been of a diverse nature. Among proposed techniques we can count bone graft and maxillary sinus elevation. In order to avoid this type of procedures, a different surgical alternative has been developed: this technique consists on placing four implants, two anterior and two tilted posterior implants, all linked by an infrastructure. The clinical case here presented describes a technique used to restore an atrophic maxilla following the «All-on-Four» concept, with immediate load. The patient was subjected to a one year follow-up and was satisfied with the treatment outcome. To this date, no clinical or radiographic changes have been observed around the dental implants nor have there been prosthetic complications.

REFERENCES

1. Brånemark PI. Osseointegration and its experimental background. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 1983; 50 (3): 399-410.

2. Bezerra F, Azoubel E. Alternativas cirúrgicas no tratamento da maxila atrófica. In: Bezerra F, Lenharo A. Terapia clínica avançada em implantodontia. São Paulo: Artes Médicas; 2002. p. 159.

3. De Leo C. Carga imediata em implantes osseointegrados inclinados: aumentando a superfície de ancoragem: relato de dois casos. Odonto Ciencia. 2002; 17: 231-238.

4. Kahnberg KE, Nystrom E, Bartholdsson L. Combined use of bone grafts and Branemark fixtures in the treatment of severely resorbed maxillary. International Journal of Oral Maxillofacial Implants. 1989; 4 (4): 297-304.

5. Falk H, Laurell L, Lundgren D. Occlusal interferences and cantilever joint stress in implant-supported prostheses occluding with complete dentures. International Journal of Oral Maxillofacial Implants. 1990; 5 (1): 277-283.

6. Aparicio C, Arevalo X, Ouzzani W, Granados C. A retrospective clinical and radiographic evaluation of tilted implants used in the treatment severely resorbed edentulous maxillary. Appl Osseointegration Res. 2003; 1: 17-21.

7. Reiser GM. Implant use in the tuberosity, pterygoid, and palatine region: anatomic and surgical considerations. In: Nevisns M, Melloning JT. Implant therapy. Quintessence Books. 1998; 2: 197-207.

8. Benzing UR, Gall H, Weber H. Biomechanical aspects of two different implant-prosthetic concepts for edentulous maxillary. International Journal of Oral Maxillofacial Implants. 2004; 35 (6): 188-198.

9. Skalak R, Zhao Y. Similarity of stress distribution in bone for various implant surface roughness heights of similar form. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research. 2000; 2 (4): 225-230.

10. Brånemark PI, Svensson B, Van Steenberghe D. Ten-year survival rates of fixed prostheses on four or six implants ad modum Brånemark in full edentulismo. Clinical Oral Implant Research. 1995; 6 (4): 227-231.

11. Maló P, Rangert B, Nobre M. «All-on-Four» immediate-function concept with Brånemark system implants for completely edentulous mandibles: a retrospective clinical study. Clinical Implant Dentistry Related Research. 2003; (Supp 1): 2-9.

12. Callandriello R, Tomantis M. Simplified treatment of the atrophic posterior maxilla via immediante/early function and tilted implants: a prospective 1-year clinical study. Clinical Implant Dentistry Related Research. 2005; (Supp1): 1-12.

13. Ferreira AR, Bezerra JB, De Souza SW, Torres E, Da Rocha BV, Lenharo A. O uso de implantes inclinados com carga imediata funcional na reabilitação da maxila completamente edêntula. Innovations Journal. 2004; 6: 33-38.