Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Basics of Dental Implantology For The Oral Surgeon
Basics of Dental Implantology For The Oral Surgeon
Dental Implantology
for the Oral Surgeon 18
Supriya Ebenezer, Vinay V. Kumar, and Andreas Thor
18.1 H
istory and Evolution of Dental surface, and the American Core vent implants made of tita-
Implants nium aluminum vanadium alloy [1]. However, based on the
research from Albrektsson, commercially pure titanium
Modern implant dentistry started more than 50 years ago became the material of choice. One-piece implants slowly
when Dr. P.I. Brånemark, a Professor from the University of evolved to two-piece implants to provide prosthetic
Gothenburg (Sweden), discovered in rabbit studies that tita- flexibility.
nium chambers placed in the fibula became firmly anchored Over the next 15 years, implantology shifted from the
in bone and could not be removed. Later, this direct bone-to- treatment of fully edentulous patients to the treatment of par-
implant contact was termed osseointegration [1]. He demon- tially edentulous patients as well. Prosthetic components for
strated that titanium was structurally integrated into living the rehabilitation of different edentulous situations emerged,
bone with a high degree of predictability and without long- and different surgical techniques and regenerative materials
term soft-tissue inflammation or fixture rejection. He intro- were developed to improve the hard and soft tissues around
duced a two-stage threaded root form pure titanium implant implants. Concepts of implant placement, loading, occlu-
that was placed in patients in 1965. Therefore, Prof. sion, and maintenance evolved. Progress was made in
P.I. Brånemark is recognized as the most important pioneer implant surface technology, which permitted the use of
in modern implant dentistry. shorter and narrower implants and reduced loading time [2].
The second pioneer is Prof. Andre Schroeder from the Over the last decade, development has included strategies to
University of Bern (Switzerland) experimented with proto- provide long-term stability with optimum functional,
type dental implants in the early 1970s and could demon- esthetic, and phonetic results along with reduced complica-
strate first osseointegration in nondecalcified histologic tions. Advanced diagnostic aids, such as cone beam com-
sections [1]. Both pioneers with their teams, independent of puted tomography (CBCT), enabled proper assessment of
each other, performed several preclinical and clinical studies the surgical site and surgical planning to provide better out-
to establish the current scientific basis for dental implantol- comes. Devices to examine implant stability objectively,
ogy. This was the start to successful osseointegration in using resonance frequency analysis, improved the quality of
dentistry. treatment provided. Digital technology is increasingly being
Between the 1970s and the 1980s, companies presented incorporated to improve accuracy, minimize invasiveness,
different implant designs such as the Tübingen implants and fulfill esthetic demands. On the material front, ceramic
made of aluminum oxide, the IMZ titanium plasma-sprayed implants and implants using alloys of increased strength
have been introduced [2]. The field of implantology is a fast-
Electronic Supplementary Material The online version of this chap- evolving one where the clinician has to be constantly updated
ter (https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1346-6_18) contains supple- to keep pace.
mentary material, which is available to authorized users.
few weeks due to bone remodeling and then increases again layer protects against corrosion and also helps in calcium
due to new bone formation (secondary stability). The s tability and phosphate ion exchange at the surface. Surfaces were
also depends on biophysical stimulation and the healing modified to increase microroughness and hence the sur-
time. To clinically evaluate osseointegration mobility tests, face area for osseointegration. The additive processes are
standardized radiographs and Resonance Frequency Analysis Ti plasma spraying, hydroxyapatite coating, discrete crys-
(RFA) are used [6]. talline deposition (DCD), and electrochemical anodiza-
tion (to increase the TiO2 layer). These processes increased
the surface area for bone contact with the implant surface,
18.2.3 Factors that Determine which increases the osseointegration. Subtractive pro-
Osseointegration cesses to increase microroughness were also utilized in
several implants to increase the microroughness, which
There are many factors that influence the formation and also contributed to better osseointegration. Sandblasting,
maintenance of bone at the implant surface [3, 6]. acid etching, and laser modification are some of the sub-
tractive processes. Sandblasting produces a macrotexture,
1. Biocompatibility of the implant material - Commercially which is converted to a microtexture by acid etching. This
pure titanium (CpTi) is widely used as an implant mate- surface promotes greater osseous contact at earlier time
rial as it is highly biocompatible, it has good resistance to points compared to plasma- sprayed coated implants.
corrosion and no toxicity on macrophages or fibroblasts Titanium surfaces were treated with fluoride, and this
and lacks inflammatory response in peri-implant tissues, roughened the surface and demonstrated better bone
and it is composed of an oxide layer and has the ability to anchorage, as compared to unmodified titanium surfaces
repair itself by re-oxidation when damaged. Alloys of [10]. Research is currently oriented toward making biomi-
titanium such as Ti-6Al-4 V (Aluminum 6% and metic implant surfaces that shorten healing times and pro-
Vanadium 4%) and other Aluminum and Vanadium-free vide better bone to implant contact [11].
alloys of Titanium have been popularly used. Currently, a 4. Systemic factors – Irradiation of the region, osteoporosis,
Ti-Zr alloy (Titanium 83–87% and Zirconium 13–17%) smoking, and diabetes although not absolute contraindi-
has been introduced, which has mechanical properties cations for implant placement can interfere with the nor-
superior to those of CpTi and Ti-6Al-4 V [8]. mal healing process and osseointegration. Heavy smoking
2. Implant geometry - The shape of the implant determines results in significantly lower success rates with oral
the surface area available for stress transfer and the initial implants [12]. The local site anatomy such as the amount
stability of the implant. Implants were previously available of residual ridge for successful implant placement can
as cylinders, but currently, most implants come in screw- also affect the outcome [13].
shaped (threaded) designs. Threaded implants with a circu- 5. Surgical technique – The extent of tissue manipulation,
lar cross section provide easy surgical placement and thermal irritation by use of rotary instruments, and proto-
provide a greater functional surface area. These implants cols for a surgical procedure can affect the outcome of
provide initial rigid fixation and limit micromovement dur- osseointegration [14].
ing wound healing. The shape of the thread alters the force 6. Occlusal load – During the initial healing phase, the
transmitted to the bone; it can be square, V, or reverse but- absence of micromotion is critical for implant osseointe-
tress shaped. The thread depth increases the surface area of gration. Based on the primary stability achieved, different
the implant. Length of the implant contributes to the over- protocols for loading are selected. The amount of force and
all surface area. Increasing the length within limits timing of loading are critical for osseointegration [15].
increases the bone to implant contact for an implant, which
is essential for osseointegration. Shorter implants are rec-
ommended today only with strict selection criteria and
preferably work well only when splinted with other 18.3 Comparison Between Implant
implants. Considering the width of an implant, although a and Tooth Surface [16]
wider implant increases the surface area for osseointegra-
tion, width depends on factors related to the surgical site. Figure 18.2a, b, and c show the differences between implants
Overall, the shorter and smaller diameter implants have and tooth.
lower survival rates than their longer or wider counterparts. Implant prosthetics provide highly esthetic results that
Longer implants have been suggested to provide greater mimic the natural tooth; however, certain critical differences
stability under lateral loading conditions [9]. in the structure of the peri-implant tissues and periodontal
3. Surface characteristics –With exposure to air, Ti and its structures exist. The lack of a periodontal ligament is the
alloys form an oxide layer on the surface (TiO2). The oxide most striking difference; this absence means that the connec-
388 S. Ebenezer et al.
Gingival tissue
Gingival tissue
Dentin
(Dentinal tubules)
Implant
Periodontal ligament
Bone (connective tissue)
(direct attachment)
b c
Fig. 18.2 (a, b, and c) show diagrammatic representation of the biological differences between an implant and a tooth in longitudinal section
18 Basics of Dental Implantology for the Oral Surgeon 389
tion between the implant and the surrounding bone is not as the most widely used and documented form of
resilient as that around the tooth. Implants, unlike teeth, do implants.
not intrude or migrate to compensate for premature contacts, (ii) Cylindrical and tapered implants:
and hence, the repercussions of occlusal disharmony can be Based on the shape of the implant body, implants
detrimental. Implants lack proprioception and reflex func- are considered cylindrical (with parallel walls) or
tion due to the absence of the periodontal ligament. This is tapered. When the endosseous part of a cylindrical
critical when implant-supported prosthesis opposes each implant narrows in diameter toward the apex, an
other. Implants do not supraerupt with time and hence lead to implant is considered tapered. The taper can be in
occlusal disharmonies when used as replacements for young the cervical, middle, or apical parts only or continu-
and growing individuals. Hence, any form of overload on an ously taper from the cervical to the apex. Tapered
implant causes fracture in the prosthesis, the implant struc- implants were introduced to improve initial stabil-
ture, or bone loss surrounding the implant. ity in less dense bone.
(iii) Platform switch implants:
When a smaller-diameter abutment is used on a
18.4 Types of implants larger-diameter implant collar, the implant-
abutment junction shifts inward toward the central
axis of the implant. This is considered to be a major
(a) Based on the type of material: factor in limiting crestal bone resorption especially
(i) Pure titanium and titanium alloys: in esthetic sites.
Commercially pure titanium(CpTi) was the (iv) Bone-level and tissue-level implants:
material of choice due to its high biocompatibility Tissue-level implants have a butt joint transition
and resistance to corrosion. CpTi is available in from the smooth collar to the rough portion, and
Grades I to IV; however, to improve the mechanical this transition zone is placed almost level with the
properties, alloys of titanium such as Ti-6Al-4 V bony crest. This design is generally used for non-
have been used. Several alloys with Ti, such as submerged healing; here, the implant-abutment
Ti-Au, Ti-In, Ti-Sn, Ti-Pb, Ti-Cu, and Ti-Nb, have microgap is away from the bony tissues. Bone-level
been tested. A Ti-Zr alloy (Titanium 83–87% and implants have minimal/no smooth collar and are
Zirconium 13–17%) is presently very popular as it completely microrough, and they are inserted
has mechanical properties superior to those of the almost level with the bone. This is meant for sub-
previously used alloys as well as high corrosion merged healing, and here, the implant-abutment
resistance. microgap is adjacent to the bone crest. In these
(ii) Zirconia implants: implants, platform switch is used to limit crestal
These implants are made from the oxide form of bone resorption.
Zirconia (ZnO2) and are “ceramic” implants that (c) Based on implant surface.
have high biocompatibility and ability to osseointe- (i) Machined (Brånemark surface):
grate. In addition to the high mechanical properties, These are the minimally rough implant surfaces
they were introduced especially for esthetic areas made of turned CpTi, which were not further
and in patients who maybe potentially allergic to treated. These were used earlier and are also well
titanium. The drawback of these implants is that documented. However, with a need to increase the
most of the designs are one piece and only a few surface area for bone attachment especially in less
systems have two-piece implants. The idea of zirco- dense bone and to reduce time for osseointegration,
nia implants seems to be potential; however, no these surfaces were modified. Smooth surfaces had
long-term evidence for its success exists at this time. an advantage of reduced attachment of plaque
(b) Based on the shape: biofilms.
(i) Screw-type implants: (ii) Textured/rough surfaces:
Threads in screw-type implants increase the sur- The smooth surfaces of the implants were
face area for osseointegration. Threads help in sta- altered to a textured surface to increase the surface
bilization by improving bone to implant contact area for osseointegration. They were classified as
and in stress distribution. There are several differ- macro-, micro-, and nano-sized topologies based
ences in thread shape, thickness, pitch, thread-face on the scale of roughness [17, 18].
angle, etc. based on the manufacturers. These are Macrotopographic profiles of dental implants had
390 S. Ebenezer et al.
a b
Fig. 18.3 (a and b) show examples of two-dimensional and 3-dimensional examination of an implant placed with sinus floor elevation
example, if an implant of 4.1 mm in diameter is placed If placed too close to the adjacent teeth, it causes bone
between two natural teeth, the minimum mesiodistal loss. In the orofacial dimension, the implant shoulder is
distance available should be 7 mm (to allow 1.5 mm positioned palatal to the incisal edge of the future resto-
between the implant and the natural teeth on either side). ration (or 1 mm palatal to the point of emergence of the
a b
Fig. 18.4 (a, b, and c) diagrammatic representation of ideal placement of a single implant in green shadow and unideal positions that could lead
to complications (in red shadow). (a) ideal coronoapical position, (b) ideal mesiodistal position, and (c) ideal orofacial position
18 Basics of Dental Implantology for the Oral Surgeon 393
Fig. 18.4 (continued)
adjacent teeth). The oral aspect has a danger zone as sentation of the distance between interdental contact
well, indicating that an implant should not be placed too point and the crest of bone, for adequate papilla
far orally to prevent the use of a ridge lap restoration. preservation).
Too far facially will result in increased mucosal reces- 2. Implants adjacent to each other: The mesiodistal distance
sion. In the apicocoronal direction, the apex of the between the implants should be at least 3 mm [25, 26].
implant should be at least 1-2 mm away from any ana- This is critical to allow adequate interimplant bone and
tomical structure such as nerve, sinus, or tooth roots. hence the formation of a soft tissue papilla overlying the
Also, in the shoulder of the future implant should be at bone. The other requisites for mesiodistal, orofacial, and
least 1 mm apical to the cementoenamel junction of the apicocoronal dimensions, as previously mentioned, apply
adjacent teeth to allow for a proper emergence profile in addition. (Figure 18.5b shows diagrammatic represen-
[25]. Placing an implant too deep will result in too tation of the distance between interdental contact point
much countersinking, difficult handling, and facial and the crest of bone, for adequate papilla preservation).
mucosal recession. Placing an implant too superficially When the space for an implant of a particular diameter
will cause the metal margin to be visible and improper is less than ideal, a decision should be made either to aug-
emergence profile. In addition to this, the ideal facial ment the site with bone or to choose an implant of smaller
bone thickness should be 2 mm [26] and the lingual diameter. However, this decision requires clinical exper-
bone thickness should be 1.5 mm. Hence, for a 4.1 mm tise as augmentation procedures are technique sensitive
implant, minimum orofacial distance should be approx- and using smaller diameter implants depends on evalua-
imately 7.5 mm. Also, to prevent the appearance of tion of the occlusal forces in the area. The interocclusal
black triangles, the apicocoronal distance from the distance also needs to be evaluated prior to implant place-
interdental contact point to the crest of bone should not ment as it determines the choice of prosthetic rehabilita-
exceed 5 mm. (Figure 18.5a shows diagrammatic repre- tion of the implant. If the interocclusal distance is reduced,
394 S. Ebenezer et al.
a b
Fig. 18.5 (a and b) diagrammatic representation of the critical dimen- interdental papillary morphology. (b) The interimplant distance (D)
sions in implant placement in relation to interdental papilla. (a) The should be at least 3 mm for obtaining adequate interdental papillary
height (H) of the interdental contact from the crest of the interdental morphology
alveolar bone should not be more than 5 mm for obtaining adequate
the choice would be to use a screw-retained prosthesis This provides the clinician an assessment of the site for
over a cement-retained one. Screw-retained prosthesis, implant placement before the surgery is planned and is based
however, is the more preferred technique due to ease in on the level of expertise of the clinician who can either treat
retrievability and cleansability. or refer to a specialist.
The amount of keratinized tissue in the site should also The determinants of the classification are.
be evaluated before surgery as this determines the loca-
tion of the incision. Ideally, a band of at least 2 mm (mini- 1. Esthetic or nonesthetic site: Any case in the esthetic zone
mum 1 mm) keratinized tissue should surround the or has an esthetic risk should be considered as advanced
implant, and this is critical to the long-term success of the or complex.
implant. If this is not achievable, procedures to augment 2. Complexity of the process: The level of complexity can
the keratinized mucosa should be planned. Keratinized be assessed by considering the number of steps and the
mucosa is necessary as it provides a physical barrier to number of areas in which an acceptable outcome has to be
oral plaque and to the forces of mastication as compared achieved.
to nonkeratinized mucosa [27]. 3. Risk of complications: The SAC Classification can be
used to identify and quantify risks for complications. This
allows pretreatment planning to control and minimize
18.6 SAC Classification risks.
The International Team for Implantology (ITI) proposed a The general modifying factors are.
classification of sites for implant placement based on the
analysis of several factors [28]. 1. Clinical competence and expertise: The SAC Classification
Based on these factors, sites for implant surgery could be for a case type is independent of the clinician’s skill and
classified as straightforward (S), advanced (A), and complex (C). competence. A Straightforward case is an uncomplicated
18 Basics of Dental Implantology for the Oral Surgeon 395
procedure, and a Complex case is the one that is difficult The above-mentioned modifiers have to be considered
to manage. for every implant case during the assessment and planning
2. Compromised patient’s health: Patients with risk factors phase of treatment. Risks can be identified prior to treat-
such as smoking, diabetes, irradiated bone, history of ment, thus minimizing complications. To classify as
periodontal disease, poor oral hygiene, and bruxism need Straightforward, Advanced, or Complex for a specific case,
to be monitored as they have a higher risk for the specific features of the case can be matched with the
complications. descriptions in the tables. The level that best matches the
3. Growth considerations: Implants placed in the jaws of factors of the individual case will provide the SAC
growing individuals are modifying factors as they present Classification for that case.
esthetic and functional issues. The final treatment plan including additional surgical pro-
4. Iatrogenic factors: Suboptimal planning and treatment cedures (if required) should be formulated after accurate
outcomes increase the difficulty in the implant treatment diagnosis and consideration of the patient’s systemic and
phase. For example, incorrect three-dimensional implant local factors, bearing in mind the requirements of the patient.
placement will complicate the restorative process.
Table 18.2 Surgical modifying factors
Tables 18.1, 18.2, and 18.3 show the esthetic, surgical,
Site factors Risk or degree of difficulty
and restorative modifying factors to be considered during
Low Moderate High
implant treatment planning and execution. Anatomic risk
Proximity to Minimal risk Moderate risk of High risk of
vital anatomic of involvement involvement
structures involvement
Table 18.1 The esthetic modifying factors are determined by the Bone volume
Esthetic Risk Assessment (ERA) Horizontal Adequate Deficient, but Deficient,
allowing requiring prior
Esthetic factors Level of risk simultaneous augmentation
Low Medium High augmentation
Medical status Healthy and – Reduced Vertical Adequate Small deficiency Deficient,
co-operative patient immune crestally, requiring requiring prior
with an intact system slightly deeper augmentation
immune system. coronoapical
Patients’ Low Medium High implant position.
esthetic Small deficiency
expectation apically due to
Smoking habit Nonsmoker Light smoker Heavy proximity to
(<10 cigs/day) smoker (>10 anatomical
cigs/day) structures, requiring
Lip line Low Medium High shorter than
Shape of tooth Rectangular Triangular standard implant
crowns lengths.
Gingival Low scalloped and Medium High Esthetic risk
biotype thick scalloped and scalloped Esthetic zone No Yes
medium thick and thin Biotype Thick Thin
Bone anatomy Alveolar crest Horizontal Vertical bone Thickness of Sufficient Insufficient
of alveolar crest without bone bone deficiency facial bone ≥1 mm <1 mm
deficiency deficiency wall
Bone level at ≤5 mm to contact 5.5 to 6.5 mm ≥7 mm to Complexity
adjacent teeth point to contact contact point Number of Implant Implant placement Implant
point prior or placement with simultaneous placement
Soft tissue Intact soft tissue Soft tissue simultaneous without procedures with staged
anatomy defects procedures adjunctive procedures
Width of 1 tooth (≥7 mm) 1 tooth 2 teeth or procedures
edentulous span (≤7 mm) more Complications
Restorative Virgin Restored Risk of Minimal Moderate High
status of surgical
neighboring complications
teeth Consequences No adverse Suboptimal Severely
Infection at None Chronic Acute of effect outcome compromised
implant site complications outcome
Adapted with permission from Dawson A, Chen S, Buser D, Cordaro L, Adapted with permission from Dawson A, Chen S, Buser D, Cordaro L,
Martin W, Belser U. The SAC Classification in Implant Dentistry. Martin W, Belser U. The SAC Classification in Implant Dentistry.
Editors: Dawson A, Chen S. Quintessence Publishing Co. Ltd. 2009 Editors: Dawson A, Chen S. Quintessence Publishing Co. Ltd. 2009
396 S. Ebenezer et al.
Table 18.3 Restorative modifiers: These are the restorative factors that influence the SAC classification
Degree of difficulty
Issue Notes Low Moderate High
Oral environment
General oral health No active disease Active disease
Condition of adjacent Restored teeth Virgin teeth
teeth
Reason for tooth loss Caries/trauma Periodontal disease or
occlusal parafunction
Occlusion
Occlusal scheme Anterior guidance No guidance
Involvement in The degree to which the implant Minimal involvement Implant restoration is
occlusion prosthesis is involved in the patient’s involved in guidance
occlusal scheme
Occlusal parafunction Risk of complication to the restoration, Absent
but not to implant survival
Restorative volume
Interarch distance Refers to the distance from the proposed Adequate for planned Restricted space, but Adjunctive therapy will be
implant restorative margin to the restoration can be managed necessary to gain sufficient
opposing occlusion space for the planned
restoration
Mesiodistal space The arch length available to fit tooth Sufficient to fit Some reduction in Adjunctive therapy will be
replacements replacements for size or number of needed to achieve a
missing teeth teeth will be satisfactory result
necessary
Span of restoration Missing tooth Extended edentulous Full arch
space
Volume and Refers to whether there is sufficient tissue No prosthetic Prosthetic replacement of
characteristics of the volume to support the final restoration, or soft-tissue soft tissue will be needed
edentulous saddle some prosthetic replacement of soft replacement will be for esthetics or phonetics
tissues will be necessary necessary
Provisional Present
restorations
During implant Not required Fixed
healing
Implant supported Provisional restorations will be needed to Not required Restorative margin Restorative margin >3 mm
provisionals needed develop esthetics and soft tissue transition <3 mm apical to apical to mucosal crest
zones mucosal crest
Materials/ Materials and techniques used in the Resin-based materials Porcelain fused to
manufacture manufacture of definitive prostheses ± metal reinforcement metal
Loading protocols To date, immediate restoration and Conventional or early Immediate loading
loading procedures are lacking scientific loading
documentation
Maintenance needs Anticipated maintenance needs based on Low Moderate High
patient presentation and the planned
prosthesis
Adapted with permission from Dawson A, Chen S, Buser D, Cordaro L, Martin W, Belser U. The SAC Classification in Implant Dentistry. Editors:
Dawson A, Chen S. Quintessence Publishing Co. Ltd. 2009
18.7 I mplant Solutions for Different and if the opposing dentition is implant-supported or not and
Edentulous Situations depending on the occlusal load. As few as possible but as
many as needed should be the key when placing implants.
Implants can be used as replacement options for all kinds of The selection of the size of the implant (length and width)
edentulous situations varying from single tooth gaps to com- and the number of implants especially in areas of poor bone
pletely edentulous jaws (Figure 18.6 shows an example quality is important for providing the correct solution.
where an implant has been used for the restoration of single For large edentulous spans, it is preferable to use as many
tooth, and 7b shows an example where implants have been implants as required, to support the occlusal forces in that
used for the replacement of the edentulous upper and lower area. Cantilever prosthesis on implants has to be used with
jaws). The treatment plan varies in complexity as the number discretion and is limited to areas of low occlusal demand. It
of teeth replacements increases, if it is an esthetic site or not is not preferable to splint implant with natural teeth as
18 Basics of Dental Implantology for the Oral Surgeon 397
18.8 T
iming of Implant Placement
Postextraction
sue thickness has not shown significant correlation to the The choice of timing of implant placement depends on
underlying facial bone wall thickness [36]. For single extrac- several factors. The four options are available to the clini-
tion sites, 50% of the soft tissue change occurs within the first cian, who can select the option based on the following crite-
2 weeks postextraction. The increase in soft tissue thickness ria, provided that they have the required clinical expertise.
significantly depends on the underlying bone dimensions. In
thick wall phenotypes, the soft tissue dimensions do not sig- • Immediate implant placement (type I) is recommended to
nificantly change. In these defects, the alveolus acts as a self- be performed only by experienced clinicians in sites that
contained bony defect and favors the growth of bone-forming have ideal anatomic conditions, such as:
cells from the adjacent socket walls. In thin wall phenotypes, (i) a completely intact, thick wall phenotype (i.e.,
the facial bone wall resorbs rapidly and the highly prolifera- >1mm) facial bone wall at the extraction site
tive soft tissue occupies its position. There is a sevenfold (ii) thick gingival biotype,
increase in soft tissue occupying the crestal area of the socket (iii) absence of acute infection at the extraction site, and
defect, and this is termed as spontaneous soft tissue thickening (iv) adequate volume of bone apical and palatal of the
[13]. The tissue formed is highly vascularized granulation tis- extraction site to allow sufficient primary stability of
sue with fibroblasts migrating into it, some of which differen- the implant while placing it in the correct
tiate into myofibroblasts that are involved in the thickening 3-dimensional position.
phenomenon. At 8 weeks, there is a peak in endothelial cell • Type 2 placement is recommended when the above ideal
density, BMP-7, and osteocalcin expression, indicating that conditions are not met.
the molecular and cellular mechanisms that regulate new bone (i) In situations where there is inadequate keratinized
formation also influence the soft tissue thickening. The clini- tissue, this technique allows an additional 3-5 mm of
cal implications of this soft tissue thickening are that, after an tissue as the tissues heal spontaneously.
8 week healing period, the soft tissues are sufficiently thick- (ii) In sites where there is a thin facial bone, the bundle
ened and provide increased keratinized tissue in the site that bone spontaneously resorbs and a spontaneous soft
allows for primary closure favoring bone regeneration. With tissue thickening takes place to fill the extraction
this thickened soft tissue, there is no requirement for addi- socket.
tional soft tissue grafts. However, this soft tissue thickening (iii) Acute and chronic infections resolve leaving the
can mask the underlying bone defect, often misleading the cli- future implant site free of infections.
nician while selecting the appropriate treatment protocol [37]. (iv) Bone forms in the apical portion of the socket, thus
allowing primary stability from the apical bone dur-
ing implant placement. At the stage of implant place-
18.8.2 Concept of Timing for Implant ment, a guided bone regeneration procedure with
Placement bone graft and membrane is most often required.
• Type 3 implant placement is recommended in cases where
Implant placement can be classified based on the timing of either primary stability cannot be achieved even after
implant placement. According to the ITI Consensus 4–8 weeks of healing postextraction or where the proper
Conferences in 2003 and 2008, it is classified as Type 1, 3-dimensional position for implant placement cannot be
Type 2, Type 3, and Type 4 implant placement [38]. achieved. The healing time in these cases is extended to
12–16 weeks to allow partial bone healing. This is gener-
ally ideal for multirooted teeth such as mandibular molars.
Box 18.2 Concept of Timing for Implant Placement In this case also, guided bone regeneration with bone
graft and membrane is often required.
Type 1: When placed immediately after tooth extrac- • Type 4 implant placement is often not a preferred treat-
tion, it is called immediate implant placement. ment by the patient. However, the indications for this type
Type 2: When placed 4–8 weeks after tooth extraction, of implant placement are determined by certain patient-
it is an early implant placement with only soft tissue related factors or site-specific factors. Patient related fac-
healing tors include.
Type 3: When placed 12–16 weeks after tooth extrac- (i) patients with systemic conditions that require treat-
tion, it is an early implant healing with partial bone ment to be deferred, e.g., pregnant patients,
healing (ii) adolescent patients who are too young to receive
Type 4: When placed after 6 months after tooth extrac- implants and require the treatment to be deferred,
tion, there is complete bone healing, and this is and
called delayed implant placement. (iii) patients who are unable to make an early appoint-
ment due to personal reasons.
18 Basics of Dental Implantology for the Oral Surgeon 399
Site-related factors include. and no microgap between the implant and the abutment. In
(a) Large Apical Lesions the two-piece nonsubmerged implants, there is no need for a
(b) Impacted or ankylosed teeth that cause a lot of second surgical procedure to expose the implant for prosthet-
bone removal in the apical aspect of the site. In ics; however, the potential of the microgap between the two
all these cases, it is recommended that socket components exists. This technique is generally preferred for
grafting with a low substitution filler is used to standard implant placement procedures where there is no
reduce ridge alterations and ridge atrophy. The need to augment the site.
crestal bone resorption is inevitable; however, In the submerged/two-stage approach, the healing cap/
the use of socket grafting minimizes the need for cover screw is completely covered with the soft tissue flap
ridge augmentation at a later date. after implant placement surgery. The implants are allowed to
osseointegrate in a closed environment without loading or
any form of micromovement, for a period of time. The sub-
18.8.3 Healing Modality: Concept merged protocol is used for implant placement with simulta-
of Submerged and NonSubmerged neous bone augmentation. Following this healing period, the
Healing implant is surgically exposed to place the abutment. Both
these techniques are well accepted and can be selected based
When an implant is placed, the operator can choose to either on the treatment plan.
submerge the implant (completely enclose it within the heal-
ing tissues) or keep it nonsubmerged (implant is visible
through the healing soft tissue). (Figure 18.7 shows diagram- 18.9 S
urgical Procedure for Conventional
matic representation of submerged and nonsubmerged Implant Placement
healing).
In the nonsubmerged/one-stage approach, the healing As mentioned before, the most important step before implant
cap/abutment of the implant emerges through the mucosal surgery is the analysis of the general patient factors and then
tissues at the time of flap closure after implant placement. the local edentulous site factors. Depending on whether it is
Nonsubmerged implants can be one-piece or two-piece an implant replacement for a single tooth, multiple teeth, or
implants. In one-piece implants, there is no micromovement a completely edentulous ridge, the planning differs. The
Fig. 18.7 Diagrammatic
representation of submerged
and nonsubmerged healing
treatment protocol also differs depending on whether it is an should be maintained. The drills should be repeatedly
esthetic site or not. Single tooth replacements in a nones- pumped in and out of the osteotomy to expose the bone
thetic site are simpler as compared to multiple teeth replace- debris to the water coolants for clearing. If multiple
ments in an esthetic site. implants are to be placed, a guide pin is used in the first
For standard implant placement: osteotomy to align the second implant before com-
mencing the second osteotomy preparation.
1. Local anesthesia: the area of surgery including at least (c) Subsequent drills are used in the same way as the
two teeth mesial and distal should be well-anesthetized. pilot drill to enlarge the osteotomy to the desired
2. Incision: a scalpel blade no 15 is used to make a horizon- depth.
tal paracrestal incision. This bisects the existing zone of (d) Profile drills or countersink drills are used between
keratinized mucosa with at least 2 mm on the buccal the sequential drills to widen the crestal part of the
aspect of the future implant. The incision extends to one osteotomy to allow the next drill into the osteotomy.
tooth mesially and distally with a papilla sparing incision. The countersink drill also flares the preparation to
If required, a vertical release incision can be given on the allow the placement of the cover screw over the
distal aspect to create a triangular flap. implant without any bony interference.
3. Flap elevation: A full thickness mucoperiosteal flap is (e) Bone tapping is an optional step that is required only
elevated on the buccal and on the lingual aspect. A retrac- in very dense bone. This is done at very slow speeds
tion suture can be placed in the buccal and lingual flaps if (20–40 rpm) without water irrigation.
required. The crestal bone should be exposed sufficiently 6. Implant placement: implants are placed with a handpiece
so as to get visible access to the implant site as well to at slow speeds (18–25 rpm) or by hand using a torque
check the palatal and buccal curvature of the ridge. wrench. Implant insertion should follow the same path of
4. Flattening of the ridge: A large round rose bur is used to insertion as that of the osteotomy. For multiple implants,
flatten the ridge, thus removing any bony slopes in the guide pins serve as a direction indicator to obtain parallel-
crestal area. This also allows removal of the narrower por- ism. Care is taken to insert the implant such that the
tions from the crest of the ridge; however, extensive microrough surface of the implant is 1–1.5 mm sub-
removal in short ridges should be done judiciously. crestal. This prevents exposure of the rough surface of the
5. Drilling of the osteotomy: all drilling should be done implant to the environment during the eventual crestal
along with copious amounts of cold saline irrigation with bone remodeling. The implant should also be placed such
the speed as specified by the manufacture for each par- that the shoulder of the implant should be at least 3–4 mm
ticular bur/drill (generally in the range of 800–1500 rpm). apical to the cementoenamel junction of the adjacent
It is important to keep an eye for the correct positioning teeth. It is also important that primary stability is achieved
and the neighboring anatomic structures during each at placement and the average insertion torque should be
stage of drilling. 35 Ncm2; however, ISQ values are a more accurate record-
(a) Initially, a small diamond bur is used to mark the site. ing as they can be measured from time to time and a com-
The mark created corresponds to the center of the parison can be obtained unlike insertion torque, which is
osteotomy and should be in the correct mesiodistal only a one-time measurement. Once the desired position
and buccolingual position. This bur is used to make a and stability are achieved, the cover screw (for submerged
hole of 1–2 mm deep to create a start point for the healing)/healing abutment (nonsubmerged healing)
pilot drill. should be fitted over.
(b) The pilot drill is the first twist drill used to create the 7. Flap closure and suturing: the flap should be approxi-
osteotomy up to the desired length. Ideally, the length mated so as to provide tension-free closure. If required, a
of the osteotomy should be slightly more than the periosteal release incision can be done. If a submerged
implant so that the implant can be placed slightly sub- healing is planned, the flap should be completely closed
crestal (to compensate for future crestal bone resorp- over the implant by primary closure. If a nonsubmerged
tion). Also, the shoulder of the future implant should healing is intended, then the flap is closed around the
be 1 mm apical to the cementoenamel junction of the healing abutment. Although any technique of suturing is
adjacent teeth in esthetic areas to allow for a proper acceptable, it is preferable that for long horizontal spaces,
emergence profile. While drilling, the correct axis horizontal mattress sutures along with interrupted sutures
18 Basics of Dental Implantology for the Oral Surgeon 401
a
a b
Fig. 18.8 These series of figures show steps in implant placement with able emergence profile. (cc) Checking for the depth of implant osteot-
restoration of a single tooth edentulous space. (aa) Preoperative facial omy using a depth gauge. (da) Subsequent drilling to accommodate the
view of edentulous space. (ab) Preoperative occlusal view of edentu- chosen dimension of the implant. (db) Subsequent drilling to accom-
lous space. (ac) Preoperative master cast with surgical splint. (b) modate the chosen dimension of the implant. (e) Implant insertion. (f)
Incision and reflection of mucoperiosteal flap. (ca) Initial drilling. (cb) Placement of healing abutment for transmucosal/ non submerged heal-
Checking for ideal placement of initial drill with surgical guide, which ing. (g) Suturing and wound closure
would lead to prosthodontically driven implant placement and a favor-
18 Basics of Dental Implantology for the Oral Surgeon 403
c
a b
d
a b
Fig. 18.8 (continued)
404 S. Ebenezer et al.
e f
Fig. 18.8 (continued)
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.
org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropri-
ate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in
a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statu-
tory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.