The Experts below are selected from a list of 16074 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Jan Lindhe - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
dimension of the Facial Bone wall in the anterior maxilla a cone beam computed tomography study
Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2011Co-Authors: Alessandro Lourenco Januario, Wagner Rodrigues Duarte, Mauricio Barriviera, Juliana Cristina Mesti, Mauricio G Araujo, Jan LindheAbstract:Objective: To determine the thickness of the Facial Bone wall in the anterior dentition of the maxilla and at different locations apical to the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ). Material and methods: Two-hundred and fifty subjects, aged between 17 and 66 years, with all maxillary front teeth present were included. Written informed consents were obtained. Cone-beam computed tomography scans were performed with the iCAT unit. This examination included all tooth and edentulous sites in the dentition. The images were acquired by means of the iCAT software and processed by a computer. Measurements of the (i) distance between the CEJ and the Facial Bone crest and (ii) the thickness of the Facial Bone wall were performed. The Bone wall dimensions were assessed at three different positions in relation to the Facial Bone crest, i.e., at distances of 1, 3, and 5 mm apical to the crest. Results: The measurements demonstrated that (i) the distance between the CEJ and the Facial Bone crest varied between 1.6 and 3 mm and (ii) the Facial Bone wall in most locations in all tooth sites examined was ≤1 mm thick and that close to 50% of sites had a Bone wall thickness that was ≤0.5 mm. Conclusion: Most tooth sites in the anterior maxilla have a thin Facial Bone wall. Such a thin Bone wall may undergo marked dimensional diminution following tooth extraction. This fact must be considered before tooth removal and the planning of rehabilitation in the anterior segment of the dentition in the maxilla. To cite this article: Januario AL, Duarte WR, Barriviera M, Mesti JC, Araujo MG, Lindhe J. Dimension of the Facial Bone wall in the anterior maxilla: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 22, 2011; 1168–1171 doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02086.x. 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02086.x
-
Dimension of the Facial Bone wall in the anterior maxilla: a cone‐beam computed tomography study
Clinical oral implants research, 2011Co-Authors: Alessandro Lourenco Januario, Wagner Rodrigues Duarte, Mauricio Barriviera, Juliana Cristina Mesti, Mauricio G Araujo, Jan LindheAbstract:Objective: To determine the thickness of the Facial Bone wall in the anterior dentition of the maxilla and at different locations apical to the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ). Material and methods: Two-hundred and fifty subjects, aged between 17 and 66 years, with all maxillary front teeth present were included. Written informed consents were obtained. Cone-beam computed tomography scans were performed with the iCAT unit. This examination included all tooth and edentulous sites in the dentition. The images were acquired by means of the iCAT software and processed by a computer. Measurements of the (i) distance between the CEJ and the Facial Bone crest and (ii) the thickness of the Facial Bone wall were performed. The Bone wall dimensions were assessed at three different positions in relation to the Facial Bone crest, i.e., at distances of 1, 3, and 5 mm apical to the crest. Results: The measurements demonstrated that (i) the distance between the CEJ and the Facial Bone crest varied between 1.6 and 3 mm and (ii) the Facial Bone wall in most locations in all tooth sites examined was ≤1 mm thick and that close to 50% of sites had a Bone wall thickness that was ≤0.5 mm. Conclusion: Most tooth sites in the anterior maxilla have a thin Facial Bone wall. Such a thin Bone wall may undergo marked dimensional diminution following tooth extraction. This fact must be considered before tooth removal and the planning of rehabilitation in the anterior segment of the dentition in the maxilla. To cite this article: Januario AL, Duarte WR, Barriviera M, Mesti JC, Araujo MG, Lindhe J. Dimension of the Facial Bone wall in the anterior maxilla: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 22, 2011; 1168–1171 doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02086.x. 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02086.x
Kiyoshi Koyano - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Facial Bone alterations on maxillary anterior single implants for immediate placement and provisionalization following tooth extraction a superimposed cone beam computed tomography study
Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2015Co-Authors: Taichiro Morimoto, Yoshihiro Tsukiyama, Keizo Morimoto, Kiyoshi KoyanoAbstract:Objectives The purpose of this cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) study was to describe the Facial Bone changes around single implants for immediate placement and provisionalization following tooth extraction in the maxillary anterior. Material and methods The data between 2008 and 2013 were collected retrospectively. Superimposed facio-palatal cross-sectional CBCT images for the implants were derived from preoperative and postoperative radiographs via standardized CBCT processes. Horizontal and vertical Facial measurements on the implants were identified at preoperative and approximately 1-year postoperative follow-ups. Correlation coefficient for those parameters was evaluated. Results A total of 12 single implants in 12 patients were included in this study. The mean loading period was 13.3 months (range 12–15 months). The median data of preoperative Bone thickness 0.54 mm (A), preoperative vertical Bone level 1.46 mm (B), postoperative Bone thickness 1.77 mm (C), postoperative vertical Bone level 1.08 mm (D), horizontal distance from outer surface of preoperative Facial Bone to implant surface 2.08 mm (E), horizontal gap distance 1.41 mm (E–A), horizontal Bone resorption −0.26 mm (E–C), and vertical Bone resorption −0.25 mm (B–D) were obtained. The data at the implant platform level (IPL) were selected for the horizontal measurements. Spearman's analysis demonstrated statistically significant correlations between B and D, C and E, E and E–A, and B and E–C (P < 0.01). Significant correlations between C and B, D, and E–A were also found, respectively (P < 0.05). Conclusions Immediate placement and provisionalization of single implants procedure in the maxillary anterior showed excellent outcomes with the small Facial Bone alterations around the implants. Neither preoperative Facial Bone thickness nor horizontal gap distance influenced the amount of Facial Bone resorptions.
Alessandro Lourenco Januario - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
dimension of the Facial Bone wall in the anterior maxilla a cone beam computed tomography study
Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2011Co-Authors: Alessandro Lourenco Januario, Wagner Rodrigues Duarte, Mauricio Barriviera, Juliana Cristina Mesti, Mauricio G Araujo, Jan LindheAbstract:Objective: To determine the thickness of the Facial Bone wall in the anterior dentition of the maxilla and at different locations apical to the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ). Material and methods: Two-hundred and fifty subjects, aged between 17 and 66 years, with all maxillary front teeth present were included. Written informed consents were obtained. Cone-beam computed tomography scans were performed with the iCAT unit. This examination included all tooth and edentulous sites in the dentition. The images were acquired by means of the iCAT software and processed by a computer. Measurements of the (i) distance between the CEJ and the Facial Bone crest and (ii) the thickness of the Facial Bone wall were performed. The Bone wall dimensions were assessed at three different positions in relation to the Facial Bone crest, i.e., at distances of 1, 3, and 5 mm apical to the crest. Results: The measurements demonstrated that (i) the distance between the CEJ and the Facial Bone crest varied between 1.6 and 3 mm and (ii) the Facial Bone wall in most locations in all tooth sites examined was ≤1 mm thick and that close to 50% of sites had a Bone wall thickness that was ≤0.5 mm. Conclusion: Most tooth sites in the anterior maxilla have a thin Facial Bone wall. Such a thin Bone wall may undergo marked dimensional diminution following tooth extraction. This fact must be considered before tooth removal and the planning of rehabilitation in the anterior segment of the dentition in the maxilla. To cite this article: Januario AL, Duarte WR, Barriviera M, Mesti JC, Araujo MG, Lindhe J. Dimension of the Facial Bone wall in the anterior maxilla: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 22, 2011; 1168–1171 doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02086.x. 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02086.x
-
Dimension of the Facial Bone wall in the anterior maxilla: a cone‐beam computed tomography study
Clinical oral implants research, 2011Co-Authors: Alessandro Lourenco Januario, Wagner Rodrigues Duarte, Mauricio Barriviera, Juliana Cristina Mesti, Mauricio G Araujo, Jan LindheAbstract:Objective: To determine the thickness of the Facial Bone wall in the anterior dentition of the maxilla and at different locations apical to the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ). Material and methods: Two-hundred and fifty subjects, aged between 17 and 66 years, with all maxillary front teeth present were included. Written informed consents were obtained. Cone-beam computed tomography scans were performed with the iCAT unit. This examination included all tooth and edentulous sites in the dentition. The images were acquired by means of the iCAT software and processed by a computer. Measurements of the (i) distance between the CEJ and the Facial Bone crest and (ii) the thickness of the Facial Bone wall were performed. The Bone wall dimensions were assessed at three different positions in relation to the Facial Bone crest, i.e., at distances of 1, 3, and 5 mm apical to the crest. Results: The measurements demonstrated that (i) the distance between the CEJ and the Facial Bone crest varied between 1.6 and 3 mm and (ii) the Facial Bone wall in most locations in all tooth sites examined was ≤1 mm thick and that close to 50% of sites had a Bone wall thickness that was ≤0.5 mm. Conclusion: Most tooth sites in the anterior maxilla have a thin Facial Bone wall. Such a thin Bone wall may undergo marked dimensional diminution following tooth extraction. This fact must be considered before tooth removal and the planning of rehabilitation in the anterior segment of the dentition in the maxilla. To cite this article: Januario AL, Duarte WR, Barriviera M, Mesti JC, Araujo MG, Lindhe J. Dimension of the Facial Bone wall in the anterior maxilla: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 22, 2011; 1168–1171 doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02086.x. 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02086.x
Taichiro Morimoto - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Facial Bone alterations on maxillary anterior single implants for immediate placement and provisionalization following tooth extraction a superimposed cone beam computed tomography study
Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2015Co-Authors: Taichiro Morimoto, Yoshihiro Tsukiyama, Keizo Morimoto, Kiyoshi KoyanoAbstract:Objectives The purpose of this cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) study was to describe the Facial Bone changes around single implants for immediate placement and provisionalization following tooth extraction in the maxillary anterior. Material and methods The data between 2008 and 2013 were collected retrospectively. Superimposed facio-palatal cross-sectional CBCT images for the implants were derived from preoperative and postoperative radiographs via standardized CBCT processes. Horizontal and vertical Facial measurements on the implants were identified at preoperative and approximately 1-year postoperative follow-ups. Correlation coefficient for those parameters was evaluated. Results A total of 12 single implants in 12 patients were included in this study. The mean loading period was 13.3 months (range 12–15 months). The median data of preoperative Bone thickness 0.54 mm (A), preoperative vertical Bone level 1.46 mm (B), postoperative Bone thickness 1.77 mm (C), postoperative vertical Bone level 1.08 mm (D), horizontal distance from outer surface of preoperative Facial Bone to implant surface 2.08 mm (E), horizontal gap distance 1.41 mm (E–A), horizontal Bone resorption −0.26 mm (E–C), and vertical Bone resorption −0.25 mm (B–D) were obtained. The data at the implant platform level (IPL) were selected for the horizontal measurements. Spearman's analysis demonstrated statistically significant correlations between B and D, C and E, E and E–A, and B and E–C (P < 0.01). Significant correlations between C and B, D, and E–A were also found, respectively (P < 0.05). Conclusions Immediate placement and provisionalization of single implants procedure in the maxillary anterior showed excellent outcomes with the small Facial Bone alterations around the implants. Neither preoperative Facial Bone thickness nor horizontal gap distance influenced the amount of Facial Bone resorptions.
Daniel Buser - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
influence of implant neck design on Facial Bone crest dimensions in the esthetic zone analyzed by cone beam ct a comparative study with a 5 to 9 year follow up
Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2016Co-Authors: Vivianne Chappuis, Michael M. Bornstein, Daniel Buser, Urs C. BelserAbstract:AIM To examine the influence of two different neck designs on Facial Bone crest dimensions in esthetic single implant sites after a 5-to-9-year follow-up analyzed by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). MATERIALS AND METHODS Sixty-one patients with an implant-borne single crown following early implant placement in the esthetic zone were enrolled. The test group consisted of a Bone level (BL) neck design exhibiting a hydrophilic micro-rough surface combined with a platform-switching interface (PS) (n = 20). The control group comprised a soft tissue level (STL) neck design exhibiting a hydrophobic machined surface with a matching butt-joint interface (n = 41). Standardized clinical, radiologic, and esthetic parameters were applied. The Facial Bone crest dimensions were assessed by CBCT. RESULTS Soft tissue parameters and pink esthetic scores yielded no significant differences between the two designs. Major differences were only observed at the implant shoulder level. The height of the Facial Bone crest for the BL design was located 0.2 mm above the implant shoulder level, whereas for the STL design, its location was 1.6 mm below. The width of the peri-implant saucer-like Bone defect was reduced by 40% for the BL implant design. No differences were observed 2 mm below the shoulder level. CONCLUSIONS The results of this comparative study suggest better crestal Bone stability on the Facial aspect of single implant sites in the esthetic zone for a BL design with a platform-switching concept when compared with STL implants with a butt-joint interface.
-
esthetic outcomes following immediate and early implant placement in the anterior maxilla a systematic review
International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, 2014Co-Authors: Stephen T Chen, Daniel BuserAbstract:PURPOSE The objectives of this systematic review are (1) to quantitatively estimate the esthetic outcomes of implants placed in postextraction sites, and (2) to evaluate the influence of simultaneous Bone augmentation procedures on these outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS Electronic and manual searches of the dental literature were performed to collect information on esthetic outcomes based on objective criteria with implants placed after extraction of maxillary anterior and premolar teeth. All levels of evidence were accepted (case series studies required a minimum of 5 cases). RESULTS From 1,686 titles, 114 full-text articles were evaluated and 50 records included for data extraction. The included studies reported on single-tooth implants adjacent to natural teeth, with no studies on multiple missing teeth identified (6 randomized controlled trials, 6 cohort studies, 5 cross-sectional studies, and 33 case series studies). Considerable heterogeneity in study design was found. A meta-analysis of controlled studies was not possible. The available evidence suggests that esthetic outcomes, determined by esthetic indices (predominantly the pink esthetic score) and positional changes of the peri-implant mucosa, may be achieved for single-tooth implants placed after tooth extraction. Immediate (type 1) implant placement, however, is associated with a greater variability in outcomes and a higher frequency of recession of > 1 mm of the midFacial mucosa (eight studies; range 9% to 41% and median 26% of sites, 1 to 3 years after placement) compared to early (type 2 and type 3) implant placement (2 studies; no sites with recession > 1 mm). In two retrospective studies of immediate (type 1) implant placement with Bone graft, the Facial Bone wall was not detectable on cone beam CT in 36% and 57% of sites. These sites had more recession of the midFacial mucosa compared to sites with detectable Facial Bone. Two studies of early implant placement (types 2 and 3) combined with simultaneous Bone augmentation with GBR (contour augmentation) demonstrated a high frequency (above 90%) of Facial Bone wall visible on CBCT. Recent studies of immediate (type 1) placement imposed specific selection criteria, including thick tissue biotype and an intact Facial socket wall, to reduce esthetic risk. There were no specific selection criteria for early (type 2 and type 3) implant placement. CONCLUSIONS Acceptable esthetic outcomes may be achieved with implants placed after extraction of teeth in the maxillary anterior and premolar areas of the dentition. Recession of the midFacial mucosa is a risk with immediate (type 1) placement. Further research is needed to investigate the most suitable biomaterials to reconstruct the Facial Bone and the relationship between long-term mucosal stability and presence/absence of the Facial Bone, the thickness of the Facial Bone, and the position of the Facial Bone crest.
-
Thickness of the anterior maxillary Facial Bone wall-a retrospective radiographic study using cone beam computed tomography.
The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry, 2011Co-Authors: Vedrana Braut, Michael M. Bornstein, Urs C. Belser, Daniel BuserAbstract:The purpose of this retrospective radiographic study was to analyze the thickness of the Facial Bone wall at teeth in the anterior maxilla based on cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images, since this anatomical structure is important for the selection of an appropriate treatment approach in patients undergoing postextraction implant placement. A total of 125 CBCT scans met the inclusion criteria, resulting in a sample size of 498 teeth. The thickness of the Facial Bone wall in the respective sagittal scans was measured perpendicular to the long axis of the tooth at two locations: at the crest level (4 mm apical to the cementoenamel junction; MP1) and at the middle of the root (MP2). No existing Bone wall was found in 25.7% of all teeth at MP1 and in 10.0% at MP2. The majority of the examined teeth exhibited a thin Facial Bone wall (< 1 mm; 62.9% at MP1, 80.1% at MP2). A thick Bone wall (? 1 mm) was found in only 11.4% of all examined teeth at MP1 and 9.8% at MP2. There was a statistically significant decrease in Facial Bone wall thickness from the first premolars to the central incisors. The Facial Bone wall in the crestal area of teeth in the anterior maxilla was either missing or thin in roughly 90.0% of patients. Both a missing and thin Facial wall require simultaneous contour augmentation at implant placement because of the well-documented Bone resorption that occurs at a thin Facial Bone wall following tooth extraction. Consequently, radiographic analysis of the Facial Bone wall using CBCT prior to extraction is recommended for selection of the appropriate treatment approach.
