MDPI - Publisher of Open Access Journals

13 pages, 3416 KiB

Open AccessEditor’s ChoiceArticle

Long-Term Clinical Outcomes of 3D-Printed Subperiosteal Titanium Implants: A 6-Year Follow-Up

by Neculai Onică, Dana Gabriela Budală, Elena-Raluca Baciu, Cezara Andreea Onică, Gabriela Luminița Gelețu, Alice Murariu, Mihail Balan, Mihaela Pertea and Carmen Stelea

J. Pers. Med. 2024, 14(5), 541; https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm14050541 - 18 May 2024

Cited by 17 | Viewed by 4530

Abstract

As an alternative to regenerative therapies, numerous authors have recently proposed bringing back subperiosteal implants. The aim of the study was to present our clinical experience with a subperiosteal jaw implant that needs minimal bone preparation and enables the rapid implantation of prosthetic teeth in edentulous, atrophic alveolar bone. The research included 36 complete or partial edentulous patients (61 subperiostal implants) over a period of 6 years. To create the patient-specific subperiostal implants design, DentalCAD 3.0 Galway software (exocad GmbH, Darmstadt, Germany) was used and fabricated with a Mysint 100 (Sisma S.p.A., Piovene Rocchette, Italy) by titanium alloy powder. The results showed that only 9 of the 36 cases were successful at 6-year follow-up, while 27 cases had complications, including exposure of the metal frame (early or delayed), mobility of the device prior to the first 4–6 months, and late mobility due to recurrent infections and progressive structure exposure; 1 case failed for reasons unrelated to the device. This study indicated that the prudent application of fully customized subperiosteal jaw implants is a dependable alternative for the dental rehabilitation of atrophic edentulous cases that necessitate bone grafts for traditional fixed dental implant solutions. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Updates in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

25 pages, 10560 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Exceptional Cases Demand Exceptional Personalized Solutions: The Next Level in Dental Rehabilitation

by Nils-Claudius Gellrich, Philippe Korn, Philipp Jehn, Michael Neuhaus, Fritjof Lentge and Björn Rahlf

J. Pers. Med. 2024, 14(3), 294; https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm14030294 - 9 Mar 2024

Cited by 4 | Viewed by 2925

Abstract

Defects and bone loss in the maxilla and mandible pose significant challenges for dental rehabilitation. This paper focuses on complex cases of bimaxillary dental rehabilitation, where traditional dental implant protocols were not feasible in at least one jaw. Four patients were examined conceptually, where conventional dental implant placement (n = 20) was combined in either the same or opposite jaw with a patient-specific subperiosteal implant (n = 5). This study evaluates aspects such as primary stability, prosthodontic restoration, complications, and soft tissue management over the observation period. None of the five patient-specific subperiosteal implants (IPS Implants^® Preprosthetic; KLS-Martin Group, Tuttlingen, Germany) experienced failure or showed any loosening of screws, with the longest observation period extending to 68 months. These implants were securely fixated away from the posts, without any biomechanical restrictions on loading from the time of insertion. Planning and manufacturing, including the initial suprastructure, followed a fully digital workflow. The number of screws required for multivector fixation ranged from 13 to 22. All dental implants placed remain functional, definitive prosthodontic restoration has been performed, and no stability loss or peri-implantitis has been observed. The IPS Implants^® Preprosthetic emerges as a valuable consideration when conventional implant dentistry protocols encounter limitations. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Personalized Diagnostics and Therapeutics for Head and Neck Surgery)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

33 pages, 8090 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Finite Element Analysis of Subperiosteal Implants in Edentulism—On the Basis of the MaI Implant^® by Integra Implants^®

by Rafal Zielinski, Jerzy Sowinski, Martyna Piechaczek, Jakub Okulski and Marcin Kozakiewicz

Materials 2023, 16(23), 7466; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16237466 - 30 Nov 2023

Cited by 10 | Viewed by 2740

Abstract

The MaI Implants^® method offers a modern treatment option for specific patients who lack sufficient bone for traditional screw-based implants. The aim of the article is to use Finite Element Analysis (FEA) to examine the behavior of a subperiosteal implant under actual conditions within the oral cavity and to assess the impact of various mechanical factors on the durability of the MaI Implants^®. A strength analysis was conducted using Finite Element Analysis for two models. The first was a single subperiosteal implant, while the second was a model of an arch consisting of two single subperiosteal implants connected by a bar. Based on the obtained results, it can be observed that the increase in load from 100 N to 800 N leads to an increase in displacements throughout the implant. Changing the angle from 90 to 30 degrees resulted in a 576% increase in the average displacement value across all multi-units. Stresses in the multi-units range from 23.7 MPa to 268.5 MPa. The lack of proper stabilization of the implant has the greatest impact on the results of displacements. Such displacements are significant for the later positioning of the implant compared to the initial conditions. Full article

(This article belongs to the Section Manufacturing Processes and Systems)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

9 pages, 3027 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Patient Satisfaction and Impact on Oral Health after Maxillary Rehabilitation Using a Personalized Additively Manufactured Subperiosteal Jaw Implant (AMSJI)

by Casper Van den Borre, Björn De Neef, Natalie A. J. Loomans, Marco Rinaldi, Erik Nout, Peter Bouvry, Ignace Naert and Maurice Y. Mommaerts

J. Pers. Med. 2023, 13(2), 297; https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm13020297 - 8 Feb 2023

Cited by 13 | Viewed by 3256

Abstract

Subperiosteal implants (SIs) were first developed by Dahl in 1941 for oral rehabilitation in case of severe jaw atrophy. Over time, this technique was abandoned due to the high success rate of endosseous implants. The emergence of patient-specific implants and modern dentistry allowed a revisitation of this 80-year-old concept resulting in a novel “high-tech” SI implant. This study evaluates the clinical outcomes in forty patients after maxillary rehabilitation with an additively manufactured subperiosteal jaw implant (AMSJI^®). The oral health impact profile-14 (OHIP-14) and numerical rating (NRS) scale were used to assess patient satisfaction and evaluate oral health. In total, fifteen men (mean age: 64.62 years, SD ± 6.75 years) and twenty-five women (mean age: 65.24 years, SD ± 6.77 years) were included, with a mean follow-up time of 917 days (SD ± 306.89 days) after AMSJI installation. Patients reported a mean OHIP-14 of 4.20 (SD ± 7.10) and a mean overall satisfaction based on the NRS of 52.25 (SD ± 4.00). Prosthetic rehabilitation was achieved in all patients. AMSJI is a valuable treatment option for patients with extreme jaw atrophy. Patients enjoy treatment benefits resulting in high patient satisfaction rates and impact on oral health. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Computer Assisted Maxillo-Facial Surgery)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 1942 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Radiographic Evaluation of Bone Remodeling after Additively Manufactured Subperiosteal Jaw Implantation (AMSJI) in the Maxilla: A One-Year Follow-Up Study

by Casper Van den Borre, Marco Rinaldi, Björn De Neef, Natalie A. J. Loomans, Erik Nout, Luc Van Doorne, Ignace Naert, Constantinus Politis, Hylke Schouten, Geert Klomp, Ludovic Beckers, Marshall M. Freilich and Maurice Y. Mommaerts

J. Clin. Med. 2021, 10(16), 3542; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10163542 - 12 Aug 2021

Cited by 24 | Viewed by 6059

Abstract

Additively manufactured subperiosteal jaw implants (AMSJI) are patient-specific, 3D-printed, titanium implants that provide an alternative solution for patients with severe maxillary bone atrophy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the bony remodeling of the maxillary crest and supporting bone using AMSJI. Fifteen patients with a Cawood–Howell Class V or greater degree of maxillary atrophy were evaluated using (cone beam) computed tomography scans at set intervals: one month (T1) and twelve months (T2) after definitive masticatory loading of bilateral AMSJI implants in the maxilla. The postoperative images were segmented and superimposed on the preoperative images. Fixed evaluation points were determined in advance, and surface comparison was carried out to calculate and visualize the effects of AMSJI^TM on the surrounding bone. A total mean negative bone remodeling of 0.26 mm (SD 0.65 mm) was seen over six reference points on the crest. Minor bone loss (mean 0.088 mm resorption, SD 0.29 mm) was seen at the supporting bone at the wings and basal frame. We conclude that reconstruction of the severely atrophic maxilla with the AMSJI results in minimal effect on supporting bone. Reduced stress shielding with a biomechanically tuned subperiosteal implant does not induce radiographically significant crestal bone atrophy. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue 3D Printing and Virtual Surgical Planning in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

Search Results (5)

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI

Saved Queries

Search Filter Reset All

Years

Feature Papers

Subjects

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (5)

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI