Logo-ajdr
Submitted: 25 Jan 2013
Accepted: 14 Mar 2013
ePublished: 25 Jun 2013
EndNote EndNote

(Enw Format - Win & Mac)

BibTeX BibTeX

(Bib Format - Win & Mac)

Bookends Bookends

(Ris Format - Mac only)

EasyBib EasyBib

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Medlars Medlars

(Txt Format - Win & Mac)

Mendeley Web Mendeley Web
Mendeley Mendeley

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Papers Papers

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

ProCite ProCite

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Reference Manager Reference Manager

(Ris Format - Win only)

Refworks Refworks

(Refworks Format - Win & Mac)

Zotero Zotero

(Ris Format - Firefox Plugin)

Avicenna J Dent Res. 2013;5(1): 10-16.
doi: 10.17795/ajdr-20753
  Abstract View: 287
  PDF Download: 534

Review Article

A Review of Dental Implant Treatment Planning and Implant Design Based on Bone Density 

Parviz Torkzaban 1, Janet Moradi Haghgoo 2, Massoumeh khoshhal 2, Syed Reza Arabi 2, Shilan Razaghi 2 *

1 Hamadan Dental Research Center, Department of Priodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, IR Iran
2 Department of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, Hamedan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, IR Iran
Corresponding author: Shilan Razaghi, Department of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, Hamedan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, IR Iran. Tel: +98-8118381085, Fax: +988118381086 shilan.r@gmail.com

Abstract

Context: A key determinant for clinical success is the diagnosis of the bone density in a potential implant site. The percentage of boneimplant contact is related to bone density, and the axial stress contours around an implant are affected by the density of bone.

Evidence Acquisition: A number of reports have emphasized the importance of the quality of bone on the survival of dental implants. The volume and density of the recipient bone have also been shown to be determining criteria to establish proper treatment plans with adequate number of implants and sufficient surface area. Previous clinical reports that did not alter the protocol of treatment related to bone density had variable survival rates. To the contrary, altering the treatment plan to compensate for soft bone types has provided similar survival rates in all bone densities.

Results: When bone density decreases and bone become softer, the implant surface in contact with the bone decreases, therefore treatment plan should be modified by changing the drilling protocol, using gradual loading and reducing the force on the prosthesis or increasing the loading area with increasing implant number, implant position, implant size, implant design (deeper and more threads with more pitch, squared shape) and implant body surface condition.

Conclusions: Once the prosthetic option, key implant position, and patient force factors have been determined, the bone density in the implant sites should be evaluated to modify the treatment plan. Inappropriate implant number or design in poor quality bone results in higher failure rates. Changing the treatment plan and implant design is suggested, based on bone density to achieve higher survival rates. 

Keywords: Bone Density, Dental Implant, Implant Design
First Name
 
Last Name
 
Email Address
 
Comments
 
Security code


Abstract View: 287

Your browser does not support the canvas element.


PDF Download: 534

Your browser does not support the canvas element.