217 posters,  30 sessions,  630 authors, 
ePostersLive® by SciGen® Technologies S.A. All rights reserved.

P5
The Prevalence of Distal Tilting of Mandibular First Molar Implants
Thursday, March 14 / 12:50-1:00pm / Monitor 1

Rate

Average: 4.5 (2 votes)
INTRODUCTION & PURPOSE 
 
The predictability of dental implants has introduced a significant change in treatment planning and treatment of fully and partially edentulous patients over the past three decades. Even though there are studies investigating the different drilling protocols, little or no data is available regarding the effect of drilling on malposition of the first molar implant placement. In this poster, surgical and restorative considerations such as implant length and drill length, drill length and diameter, straight implant vs. tapered implant, profile drill/twist drill/self-tapping feature, are discussed. A novel surgical drill set to efficiently place implants is introduced. 
 
RESULTS 
 
A preliminary study done on 11 patients in New York dental University on implant angulation of posterior mandibular implants (#30, 19) shows the following results: • 63% of cases of implants were distally placed .
• 12% of cases of implants were in middle. 
• 25% of cases of implants were is mesially placed. 
 
CONCLUSIONS 
 
Conventional drill systems in the mandibular first molar area cause implant tilting and malposition of implant due to too short shank or too long shank. 
• New set of drills allow guide and profiling, does not need drill extender. 
 
REFERENCE
 
1. Christoph H. F. Hämmerle et al. Immediate or Early Placement of Implants Following Tooth Extraction: Review of Biologic Basis, Clinical Procedures, and Outcomes IJOMI 2004 
2. Adell, R., Eriksson, B., Lekholm, U., BrSnemark, P- I. & Jemt. T. (1992) A long- term follow-up study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of totally edentulous jaws. 
International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants 5: 347-359 
3. Lindh et al, A meta-analysis of implants in partial edentulism, din Oral Impt Res 1998: 9: H0-90 
4. Michael M. Bornstein et al. IJOMI, 2008 
5. Buser D, Weber HP, Lang NP. Tissue integration of non‐submerged implants. 1‐year results of a prospective study with 100 
ITI hollow‐cylinder and hollow‐screw implants. Clin Oral Implants
Res1990; 1:33–40. 
6. Jimbo R, Janal MN, Marin C, Giro G, Tovar N, Coelho PG. The effect of implant diameter on osseointegration utilizing simplified drilling protocols. Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 25, 2014, 1295–1300


Enter Poster ID (e.gGoNextPreviousCurrent