Balkan Journal of Dental Medicine
kako citirati ovaj članak
podeli ovaj članak


  • citati u SCIndeksu: 0
  • citati u CrossRef-u:0
  • citati u Google Scholaru:[]
  • posete u poslednjih 30 dana:0
  • preuzimanja u poslednjih 30 dana:0


članak: 5 od 21  
Back povratak na rezultate
2019, vol. 23, br. 1, str. 40-44
Modern trends in prosthetic implant rehabilitation of patients: Case report with 5-year follow-up
(naslov ne postoji na srpskom)
aUniverzitet u Prištini sa privremenim sedištem u Kosovskoj Mitrovici, Medicinski fakultet
bMedical Faculty Podgorica, Podgorica, Montenegro

(ne postoji na srpskom)
Background/Aim: Implant treatment expands extensively the possibilities of prosthetic treatment, which provide benefits, bigger comfort as well as general improvement of the patient's life quality. In cases with no possibility of implantation, it is possible to improve conditions by using modern methods for bone tissue repair. One of factors important for the long-term success is proper oral hygiene, as well as raising awareness of its importance to patients. The aim of the paper is to present a patient rehabilitated with multiple implants and followed-up for a five-year period, and to point out the importance of raising patient's awareness and motivation in order to preserve the results of the treatment. Case Report: A 31-year-old patient was admitted to the oral surgery clinic for rehabilitation of a poor oral health status. After taking history, clinical examination and additional analysis, the following treatment plan was suggested: to remove impacted upper canines and to put an implant supported by fixed prosthesis in the upper jaw, to make two implants supported by bridges laterally and one dental supported by bridge in the inter-canine sector in the lower jaw. The treatment was carried out in several stages that involved extraction of residual roots and impacted teeth, augmentation of bone defects with bone substitutes and bio-absorbable membranes, placing implant, and prosthetic rehabilitation. By verbal communication with the patient, we pointed out the importance of proper oral hygiene and regular check-ups. The five year follow-up showed the absence of factors that could adversely affect the success of the treatment, and the patient was still highly motivated to maintain proper oral hygiene. Conclusions: It is possible to achieve predictable results in complex cases by using a multiphase prosthetic treatment supported by implants. Concerning a long-term success, motivation, proper information and patient's willingness to cooperate play an important role.
Augthun, M., Tinschert, J., Huber, A. (1998) In Vitro Studies on the Effect of Cleaning Methods on Different Implant Surfaces. Journal of Periodontology, 69(8): 857-864
Bazrafshan, N., Darby, I. (2013) Retrospective success and survival rates of dental implants placed with simultaneous bone augmentation in partially edentulous patients. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 25(7): 768-773
Becktor, J.P., Isaksson, S., Sennerby, L. (2004) Survival analysis of endosseous implants in grafted and nongrafted edentulous maxillae. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 19: 107-115
Benic, G.I., Hämmerle, C.H. F. (2014) Horizontal bone augmentation by means of guided bone regeneration. Periodontology 2000, 66(1): 13-40
Berglundh, T., Lindhe, J., Ericsson, I., Marinello, C. P., Liljenberg, B., Thornsen, P. (1991) The soft tissue barrier at implants and teeth. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2(2): 81-90
Blomberg, S., Lindquist, L. W. (1983) Psychological reactions to edentulousness and treatment with jawbone-anchored bridges. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 68(4): 251-262
Buch, R., Weibrich, G., Wegener, J., Wagner, W. (2002) Patient satisfaction with dental implants. Mund-, Kiefer- und Gesichtschirurgie, 6(6): 433-436
Bylund, C.L., Peterson, E.B., Cameron, K.A. (2012) A practitioner's guide to interpersonal communication theory: An overview and exploration of selected theories. Patient Education and Counseling, 87(3): 261-267
Chee, W., Felton, D.A., Johnson, P.F., Sullivan, D.Y. (1999) Cemented versus screw-retained implant prostheses: which is better?. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 14: 137-141
Đorđević, F., Stanišić, J., Đorđević, A., Vlahović, Z., Mladenović, R. (2015) Pain and justification from dental intervention. Praxis medica, vol. 44, br. 2, str. 27-30
Esposito, M., Grusovin, M.G., Coulthard, P., Worthington, H.V. (2006) The efficacy of various bone augmentation procedures for dental implants: a Cochrane systematic review of randomized controlled clinical trials. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 21: 696-710
Humphris, G.M., Dyer, T.A., Robinson, P.G. (2009) The modified dental anxiety scale: UK general public population norms in 2008 with further psychometrics and effects of age. BMC Oral Health, 9(1)
Jung, R.E., Fenner, N., Hammerle, C.H., Zitzmann, N.U. (2013) Long term outcome of implants placed with guided bone regeneration (GBR) using resorbable and non-resorbable membranes after 12 - 14 years. Clin Oral Implants Res, 24: 1065-1073
Jung, R.E., Pjetursson, B.E., Glauser, R., Zembic, A., Zwahlen, M., Lang, N.P. (2008) A systematic review of the 5-year survival and complication rates of implant-supported single crowns. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 19(2): 119-130
Lekholm, U., Zarb, G.A. (1985) Patient selection and preparation. u: Brånemark P.I., Zarb G.A., Albrektsson T. [ur.] Tissue integrated prostheses: Osseointegration in clinical dentistry, Chicago: Quintessence
Misch, C.E. (2000) Influence of biomechanics on implant complications. Acad Dental Mater Proc, 14: 49-62
Misch, C.E. (1995) Screw-retained versus cement-retained implant supported prostheses. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent, 7: 15-18
Mombelli, A., Marxer, M., Gaberthüel, T., Grander, U., Lang, N.P. (1995) The microbiota of osseointegrated implants in patients with a history of periodontal disease. Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 22(2): 124-130
Narayan, T., Narayan, S. (2010) Longitudinal Evaluation of Implants Placed into Bone Regenerated by the Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR) Technique: A Series of 7 Patients with 13 Implants of at Least 18 Months Follow-up Postloading. International Journal of Oral Implantology and Clinical Research, 89-95
Ramírez-Carrasco, A., Butrón-Téllez, G.C., Sanchez-Armass, O., Pierdant-Pérez, M. (2017) Effectiveness of Hypnosis in Combination with Conventional Techniques of Behavior Management in Anxiety/Pain Reduction during Dental Anesthetic Infiltration. Pain Research and Management, 2017: 1-5
Retzepi, M., Donos, N. (2010) Guided Bone Regeneration: biological principle and therapeutic applications. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 21(6): 567-576
Serino, G., Ström, C. (2009) Peri-implantitis in partially edentulous patients: association with inadequate plaque control. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 20(2): 169-174
Simensen, A., Bøe, O., Berg, E., Leknes, K. (2015) Patient Knowledge and Expectations Prior to Receiving Implant-Supported Restorations. International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, 30(1): 41-47
Taylor, T. (2002) Twenty years of progress in implant prosthodontics. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 88(1): 89-95
Tolstunov, L. (2016) Vertical Alveolar Ridge Augmentation in Implant dentistry : A Surgical Manual. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley
Zellin, G., Gritli-linde, A., Linde, A. (1995) Healing of mandibular defects with different biodegradable and non-biodegradable membranes: an experimental study in rats. Biomaterials, 16(8): 601-609
Zitzmann, N.U., Scharer, P., Marinello, C.P. (2001) Long-term results of implants treated with guided bone regeneration: A 5-year prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 16: 355-366

O članku

jezik rada: engleski
vrsta rada: prikaz slučaja
DOI: 10.2478/bjdm-2019-0008
objavljen u SCIndeksu: 28.03.2019.