Wook Jin Seong

Current ceramic materials and systems with clinical recommendations: A systematic review

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM Developments in ceramic core materials such as lithium disilicate, aluminum oxide, and zirconium oxide have allowed more widespread application of all-ceramic restorations over the past 10 years. With a plethora of ceramic materials and systems currently available for use, an overview of the scientific literature on the efficacy of this treatment therapy is indicated. PURPOSE This article reviews the current literature covering all-ceramic materials and systems, with respect to survival, material properties, marginal and internal fit, cementation and bonding, and color and esthetics, and provides clinical recommendations for their use. MATERIAL AND METHODS A comprehensive review of the literature was completed seeking evidence for the treatment of teeth with all-ceramic restorations. A search of English language peer-reviewed literature was undertaken using MEDLINE and PubMed with a focus on evidence-based research articles published between 1996 and 2006. A hand search of relevant dental journals was also completed. Randomized controlled trials, nonrandomized controlled studies, longitudinal experimental clinical studies, longitudinal prospective studies, and longitudinal retrospective studies were reviewed. The last search was conducted on June 12, 2007. Data supporting the clinical application of all-ceramic materials and systems was sought. RESULTS The literature demonstrates that multiple all-ceramic materials and systems are currently available for clinical use, and there is not a single universal material or system for all clinical situations. The successful application is dependent upon the clinician to match the materials, manufacturing techniques, and cementation or bonding procedures, with the individual clinical situation. CONCLUSIONS Within the scope of this systematic review, there is no evidence to support the universal application of a single ceramic material and system for all clinical situations. Additional longitudinal clinical studies are required to advance the development of ceramic materials and systems.

Elasticity of alveolar bone near dental implant-bone interfaces after one month's healing.

Information is scarce about Youngs modulus of healing bone surrounding an implant. The purpose of this preliminary study is to quantify elastic properties of pig alveolar bone that has healed for 1 month around titanium threaded dental implants, using the nanoindentation method. Two 2-year-old Sinclair miniswine were used for the study. Nanoindentation tests perpendicular to the bucco-lingual cross section were performed on harvested implant-bone blocks using the Hysitron TriboScope III. Nomarski differential interference contrast microscopy was used to identify pyramidal indentation measurements that were from bone. Reduced moduli, averaged for all anatomical regions, were found to start low (6.17 GPa) at the interface and gradually increase (slope=0.014) to a distance of 150 microm (7.89 GPa) from the implant surface, and then flatten to a slope of 0.001 from 150 to 1500 microm (10.13 GPa). Mean reduced modulus and its relationship to distance did not differ significantly by anatomic location (e.g., coronal, middle, and apical third; P>/=0.28 for all relevant tests) at 1 month after implantation.

Accuracy of friction-style and spring-style mechanical torque limiting devices for dental implants

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM Accurate delivery of torque to implant prosthetic screws is critical to generate ideal preload in the screw joint and offer protection against screw loosening. Mechanical torque limiting devices (MTLDs) are available in 2 different styles that have not been compared for accuracy. PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of friction-style and spring-style MTLDs in delivering target torque values. MATERIAL AND METHODS Five MTLDs from each of 6 different implant manufacturers (n=30) were selected to determine their accuracy relative to their target torque values. All MTLDs were new; 3 types were of the friction style while 3 were of the spring style. To measure the output of each MTLD, a digital torque gauge with a 3-jaw chuck to hold the driver was used. Force was applied to the MTLD until either the friction style released at a precalibrated torque value or the spring style flexed to a precalibrated limit. The peak torque value registered by the digital torque gauge was recorded and the procedure was repeated 50 times for each MTLD. Statistical analysis used repeated-measures ANOVA (alpha=.05) to assess the accuracy of the MTLDs in delivering target torque values. RESULTS Both the mean absolute difference (ABSDIFF) and the mean percentage deviation (PERDEV) between measured torque values and target torque values differed significantly (P<.001) for the friction-style MTLDs (3.83 Ncm, 13.74%) and for the spring-style MTLDs (0.82 Ncm, 2.36%). CONCLUSIONS Within the limitations of this study, MTLDs that use spring-style components are significantly more accurate than those that use friction-style components in achieving their target torque values.

Initial stability measurement of dental implants placed in different anatomical regions of fresh human cadaver jawbone

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM Initial implant stability has been used as an indicator for future osseointegration and whether an immediate/early loading protocol should be applied. However, differences in initial stability in relation to anatomical regions of jawbone have not been studied extensively because of the risks involved with stability measurements. PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to determine whether initial implant stability varies with anatomical regions of the jawbone. MATERIAL AND METHODS Four pairs of edentulous maxillae and mandibles were retrieved from fresh human cadavers. Six implants (Biomet 3i) per pair were placed in different anatomical regions (maxillary anterior, right and left maxillary posterior, mandibular anterior, right and left mandibular posterior). Immediately after implant placement, initial implant stability was measured with a custom-made resonance frequency analyzer, a commercial resonance frequency analysis device (Osstell), and a mechanical tapping device (Periotest). All implant surgeries and initial stability measurements were performed within 72 hours of death to simulate a clinical setting. Repeated measures ANOVA (alpha=.05) and univariate correlation analyses were used to analyze the data. RESULTS Mandibular implants had significantly higher initial stability than maxillary implants. Posterior maxillary implants were least stable. Stability was less buccolingually than mesiodistally. The measurements from 3 stability measuring devices were strongly associated with each other. CONCLUSIONS Initial implant stability varied among anatomical regions of jawbone. Rank of Periotest value and implant stability quotient (Osstell) had the highest correlation (r=-0.852).

Comparison of Push-In versus Pull-Out Tests on Bone-Implant Interfaces of Rabbit Tibia Dental Implant Healing Model

PURPOSE This study aimed to investigate whether push-in and pull-out tests measure mechanical properties of the bone-implant interface differently, and which test is more sensitive to changes over the healing period. MATERIALS AND METHODS Two identical self-threading dental implants (3.3×8.5mm) were placed in medial surface of the proximal condyles of left and right tibias of 20 rabbits (40 implants total). Five rabbits each were sacrificed after 1, 4, 8, and 12 weeks of healing. Push-in test was performed on one sides tibia implant and pull-out on the other sides implant, at a rate of 6mm/min. Primary and secondary implant stabilities and tibia weight were measured on all implants. RESULTS The push-in test generated significantly higher failure load (p=.0001; 530N vs 279N), lower displacement at failure (p=.0003; 0.436mm vs 0.680mm), and higher interface stiffness (p<.0001; 1,641N/mm vs 619N/mm) than pull-out test. Failure load, stiffness, and secondary implant stability were significantly higher for longer compared with shorter healing periods, while displacement, tibia weight, and primary stability were not. Failure load and stiffness differed significantly for four healing times for the push-in but not for the pull-out test. Failure load was significantly correlated with secondary implant stability for both push-in (r=0.66) and pull-out (r=0.48) tests, but stiffness was significantly correlated with secondary stability only for the push-in test (r=0.72; pull-out test r=0.40). CONCLUSION The push-in test appeared more sensitive than pull-out to changes in mechanical properties at bone-implant interfaces during healing in rabbit tibia model.

Expression of TGF-β1, Osteonectin, and BMP-4 in Mandibular Distraction Osteogenesis With Compression Stimulation: Reverse Transcriptase-Polymerase Chain Reaction Study and Biomechanical Test

PURPOSE This study compared the levels of transforming growth factor-beta1 (TGF-beta1), osteonectin, and bone morphogenetic protein-4 (BMP-4) expression in regenerated bone in a rabbit mandible that had undergone conventional distraction osteogenesis (DO) with those in regenerated bone from a modified DO technique with compression stimulation. MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 42 rabbits were used in this reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction study. In the control group, distraction was performed at 1 mm/day for 8 days. In the experimental group, overdistraction was performed for 10 days, followed by a 3-day latency period and 2 days of compression to achieve the same amount of DO. Three rabbits per subgroup were killed at 0, 5, 13, 20, 27, 34, and 41 days after the initial osteotomy. The levels of TGF-beta1, osteonectin, and BMP-4 in the bone regenerates were measured by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction. A biomechanical microhardness test was also performed in 8 rabbits as a separate experiment. RESULTS Reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction revealed a greater level of TGF-beta1 in the experimental group immediately after applying the compression force that continued for 2 weeks. The level then decreased to that of the control group at 3 weeks. The greater level of osteonectin in the experimental group after compression than that in the control group continued for 3 weeks. In the experimental group, the level of BMP-4 increased immediately after compression. However, the level in the control group decreased. The microhardness ratio of distracted bone to normal bone on the cortex was statistically different at 0.47 in the control group and 0.80 in the experimental group (P = .049) at 55 days after osteotomy. CONCLUSION The effectiveness of the new DO technique with compression stimulation was confirmed by the gene expression study and the biomechanical test findings.

Prevalence of Sinus Augmentation Associated With Maxillary Posterior Implants

Pneumatization of the maxillary sinus limits the quantity of alveolar bone available for implant placement and may result in a lack of primary stability and difficulty in achieving osseointegration. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively analyze a group of patients who had implants placed in the posterior maxilla, calculate the prevalence of sinus augmentation, and identify factors related to sinus augmentation. With institutional review board approval, dental records from a population of patients who had implants placed in the maxillary posterior region between January 2000 and December 2004 were used to create a database. Independent variables were classified as continuous (age of the patient at stage 1 implant surgery [S1], time between extraction and S1, time between extraction and sinus augmentation, and time between sinus augmentation and S1) and categorical (gender, implant failure, American Society of Anesthesiologists system classification, smoking, osteoporosis, residual crestal bone height, implant position, implant proximity, prostheses type, and implant diameter and length). The dependent variable was the incidence of a sinus augmentation procedure. Simple logistic regression was used to assess the influence of each factor on the presence of sinus augmentation (P < .05). The final database included 502 maxillary posterior implants with an overall survival rate of 93.2% over a mean follow-up period of 35.7 months. Of 502 implants, 272 (54.2%) were associated with a sinus augmentation procedure. Among variables, residual crestal bone height (P < .001), implant position (P < .001), implant proximity (P < .001), prosthesis type (P < .001), implant failure (P < .01), and implant diameter (P < .01), were statistically associated with sinus augmentation. Within the limitations of this retrospective study, the results suggest that more than half (54.2%) of the maxillary posterior implants were involved with a sinus augmentation procedure. The prevalence of sinus augmentation increased with decreased residual crestal bone height, more posterior implant locations, and complete or partial edentulism. Sinus augmentation was significantly associated with implant failure and wide implants.

Effect of Surgical Guide Design and Surgeon's Experience on the Accuracy of Implant Placement

Implant position is a key determinant of esthetic and functional success. Achieving the goal of ideal implant position may be affected by case selection, prosthodontically driven treatment planning, site preparation, surgeons experience and use of a surgical guide. The combined effect of surgical guide design, surgeons experience, and size of the edentulous area on the accuracy of implant placement was evaluated in a simulated clinical setting. Twenty-one volunteers were recruited to participate in the study. They were divided evenly into 3 groups (novice, intermediate, and experienced). Each surgeon placed implants in single and double sites using 4 different surgical guide designs (no guide, tube, channel, and guided) and written instructions describing the ideal implant positions. A definitive typodont was constructed that had 3 implants in prosthetically determined ideal positions of single and double sites. The position and angulation of implants placed by the surgeons in the duplicate typodonts was measured using a computerized coordinate measuring machine and compared to the definitive typodont. The mean absolute positional error for all guides was 0.273, 0.340, 0.197 mm in mesial-distal, buccal-lingual, vertical positions, respectively, with an overall range of 0.00 to 1.81 mm. The mean absolute angle error for all guides was 1.61° and 2.39° in the mesial-distal and buccal-lingual angulations, respectively, with an overall range of 0.01° to 9.7°. Surgical guide design had a statistically significant effect on the accuracy of implant placement regardless of the surgeons experience level. Experienced surgeons had significantly less error in buccal-lingual angulation. The size of the edentulous sites was found to affect both implant angle and position significantly. The magnitude of error in position and angulation caused by surgical guide design, surgeons experience, and site size reported in this study are possibly not large enough to be clinically significant; however, it is likely that errors would be magnified in clinical practice. Future research is recommended to evaluate the effect of surgical guide design in vivo on implant angulation and position error.

Potential Damage to Bone–Implant Interface When Measuring Initial Implant Stability

BACKGROUND An electronically controlled mechanical tapping device (MTD) to measure implant stability has been studied extensively for its ability to measure initial stability at the time of surgical placement and predict an implants survival prognosis, with few reported complications. METHODS Initial stability data, measured repeatedly with a resonance frequency analysis device and the MTD, for seven of 28 implants placed in jawbones of four fresh human cadavers and the histologic images of bone-implant interfaces are presented as evidence for potential damage to the bone-implant interface using these techniques. RESULTS A progressive increase in mobility from stable (-1) to less stable (4) and eventually to visibly mobile (999) was observed after three measurements with the MTD. Corresponding histologic images revealed that the buccal threads in the coronal half of the implants were displaced lingually and apically from the bony indentations that were created during insertion of the self-threading implants, subsequent to repeated MTD measurements in the buccal and axial directions. The histologic images and changes in MTD values indicated that repeated MTD measurements at the time of implant placement surgery may damage the bone-implant interface, and a stable or borderline implant may become mobile after repeated MTD measurements. CONCLUSIONS Histologic images showed potential damage to the bone-implant interface during repeated initial implant-stability measurements using the MTD. Initial implant-stability measurements using the MTD should be performed with caution, and they may be contraindicated for implants placed in low-quality bone.

Comparison of Initial Implant Stability of Implants Placed Using Bicortical Fixation, Indirect Sinus Elevation, and Unicortical Fixation.

PURPOSE The aim of this study was to determine if self-threading dental implants placed using stopper drills to bicortically engage both the alveolar crest and sinus floor (bicortical fixation) achieved primary and/or secondary stability comparable to that of short implants only engaging alveolar crest cortical bone (unicortical fixation) or implants engaging both the crest and sinus floor but via greenstick fracture and grafting (indirect sinus elevation). MATERIALS AND METHODS Thirty-eight patients exhibiting 7 to 11 mm of bone coronal to the sinus floor as confirmed by preoperative CBCT were recruited. Forty-five implants were randomly assigned to one of the placement techniques. No patient received more than two implants, which were placed in opposite sides of the maxilla while using different surgical techniques. An Osstell ISQ was employed immediately after implant placement to measure stability six times in a buccolingual dimension. Secondary stability was measured at stage-two surgery after a 3- to 6-month healing period. RESULTS The greatest primary implant stability was achieved via indirect sinus elevation. However, no statistically significant difference was found among the three surgical techniques (P = .13; bicortical fixation: 71.4 [standard error = 2.1]), unicortical fixation: 69.6 [2.1], indirect sinus elevation: 75.9 [2.3]). The three techniques had similar secondary stability (P > .999; 79.9 [1.2], 80.0 [1.2], and 80.0 [1.3], respectively). Baseline residual ridge height measured on CBCT was similar (P = .1; 8.8, 9.9, and 9.4 mm, respectively), but implant diameter and length placed in the maxilla differed (P = .03/P < .001; 4.7/11.4 mm, 4.3/8.1 mm, and 4.7/11.8 mm, respectively). Primary implant stability was significantly correlated to CBCT bone density (r = 0.37). CONCLUSION Primary and secondary implant stabilities of bicortical fixation did not differ significantly from those of unicortical fixation and indirect sinus elevation. However, use of the bicortical fixation technique is warranted since it is simpler and more economical than indirect sinus elevation; plus, it allows for longer implants than the unicortical fixation while yielding similar secondary implant stability.