Implant Installation With Simultaneous Ridge Augmentation. Report of Three Cases
The anatomic limitations of the residual alveolar bone may cause problems for the insertion of dental implants because implant placement requires an adequate quantity and quality of bone. Ridge augmentation has been performed to reconstruct alveolar ridges as support for the placement of dental implants with a high success rate. However, a staged approach requires multiple surgeries and more treatment time. In this report, the patients were treated with dental implantation with simultaneous ridge augmentation in both submerged and nonsubmerged cases. The prostheses were well in function without any probing depth or gingival inflammation up to final evaluation. It may be suggested that dental implantation with simultaneous bone grafting may be an option when the graft material can be well stabilized around the implants. Further evaluations over long periods of time are needed to monitor the clinical results.
Figure 1. Preoperative panoramic view of the computerized tomography scan. Figure 2. The occlusal view after installation of 3 implants. Figure 3. The defect was restored with deproteinized bovine bone. Figure 4. The postoperative periapical radiograph taken 9 days after the surgery.
Figure 5. The occlusal view showing the exposure of the cover screw. Figure 6. Clinical view after connection of the healing abutments. Figure 7. The radiograph taken 6 weeks after the surgery showed that the graft material was well stabilized around the defect area. Figure 8. Maturation of soft tissue was achieved.
Figure 9. The prosthesis was delivered. Figure 10. No resorption around the implants was seen. Figure 11. The buccal view showing the prosthesis well in function. Figure 12. The panoramic radiograph taken at the final examination.
Figure 13. Clinical photograph at the initial visit showing an insufficient healing around the extraction socket. Figure 14. Preoperative panoramic view of the computerized tomography scan. Figure 15. Two implants were placed in the lower left sextant. Figure 16. Occlusal view revealing uneventful soft tissue healing.
Figure 17. The periapical radiograph taken 3 months after surgery showed that the graft material was stabilized in the defect area. Figure 18. The clinical photograph at 3 months revealed good healing with the maturation of the soft tissue. Figure 19. No resorption of the graft material was seen radiographically. Figure 20. The buccal view after the delivery of the prosthesis. Figure 21. The buccal view of the prosthesis at the final follow-up evaluation.
Figure 22. Initial clinical view. Figure 23. Preoperative panoramic view of the computerized tomography scan. Figure 24. Occlusal view after the reflection of the full-thickness flap. Figure 25. The remaining defect after implant installation was grafted with deproteinized bovine bone.
Figure 26. The buccal view showing well-maintained ridge with the maturation of the soft tissue. Figure 27. The final implant-supported crowns for the upper right area were inserted 7 months after implant installation. Figure 28. The final radiograph showing the prosthesis in function.
Contributor Notes