Advertisement

Immediate, Non Submerged Root Analog Zirconia Implant in Single Rooted Tooth Replacement: Case Report with 2 years Follow Up

  • Amod Patankar
  • Rajesh Kshirsagar
  • Swapna Patankar
  • Sudhir Pawar
Case Report

Abstract

This report demonstrates the clinical use of a modified, truly anatomic, root analogue zirconia implant for immediate replacement of a right mandibular first premolar. A 22-year-old female patient with chronic apical periodontitis of the right mandibular first premolar was referred and the tooth was carefully extracted. A truly anatomical, root identical, roughened zirconia implant modified by macro-retentions was manufactured and placed into the extraction socket by tapping 3 days later. After 4 months a composite crown was cemented in place. No complications occurred during the healing period. A good functional and aesthetic result was achieved with minimal bone resorption and soft tissue recession at 18 months follow-up. This report describes the successful clinical use of an immediate, single stage, truly anatomical root-analogue zirconia implant for replacement of a single rooted tooth. Significant modifications such as macro-retentions yielded primary stability and excellent osseointegration. This novel approach is minimally invasive, respects the underlying anatomy and aids socket prevention. In addition the procedure saves time and cost, has good patient acceptance as there is no need for osteotomy, sinus lift or bone augmentation.

Keywords

Immediate implant Zirconia implant Root formed implant Zirconia as material for dental implants 

References

  1. 1.
    Andreiotelli M, Kohal RJ (2009) Fracture strength of zirconia implants after artificial aging. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 11:158–166CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Depprich R, Zipprich H, Ommerborn M, Naujoks C, Wiesmann HP, Kiattavorncharoen S, Lauer HC, Meyer U, Ku¨ bler NR, Handschel J (2008) Osseointegration of zirconia implants compared with titanium: an in vivo study. Head Face Med 4:30CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hodosh M, Povar M, Shklar G (1969) The dental polymer implant concept. J Prosthet Dent 22:371–380CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kohal RJ, Papavasiliou G, Kamposiora P, Tripodakis A, Strub JR (2002) Three dimensional computerized stress analysis of commercially pure titanium and yttrium—partially stabilized zirconia implants. Int J Prosthodont 15:189–194PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kohal RJ, Finke HC, Klaus G (2009) Stability of prototype two-piece zirconia and titanium implants after artificial aging: an in vitro pilot study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 11:323–329CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kohal RJ, Att W, Bachle M, Butz F (2000) Ceramic abutments and ceramic oral implants: an update. Periodontology 2008(47):224–243Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lundgren D, Rylander H, Andersson M, Johansson C, Albrektsson T (1992) Healing-in of root analogue titanium implants placed in extraction sockets: an experimental study in the beagle dog. Clin Oral Implants Res 3:136–143CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pirker W, Kocher A (2008) Immediate, nonsubmerged, root-analogue zirconia implant in single tooth replacement. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 37:293–295CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons of India 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amod Patankar
    • 1
  • Rajesh Kshirsagar
    • 1
  • Swapna Patankar
    • 2
  • Sudhir Pawar
    • 1
  1. 1.Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeryB V Dental College and HospitalPuneIndia
  2. 2.Oral and Maxillofacial PathologyB V Dental College and HospitalPuneIndia

Personalised recommendations