Implant Complications Flashcards

(38 cards)

1
Q

definition of primary osseointegration

A

mechanical engagement of an implant with the surrounding bone after implant insertion

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

definition of secondary osseointegration

A

wheras bone regeneration and remodeling offers secondary oseointegration

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

poor initial stability - referencing bone quantity

A

bone quantity!

- the more bone thats present at an implant site, the better the possibility for success

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

poor initial stability - referencing bone quality

A

relates to the bone DENSITY
- type i – considered the least vasuclar and most homogenous (stronger cortical bone)

type IV – thin cortex and low density trabeculae

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

type 1, II, III, and IV bone quality

A

relates to density

I – least vascular and most homogenou

II- combination of cortical bone with a marrow cavity

III- predominantly composed of trabecular bone

IV- thin cortex and low density trabeculae

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

poor initial stability - referencing implant site (poor situation examples)

A

examples
- posterior maxilla with type IV bone

less than 1 mm buccal/lingual/ palatal to the implant width

anterior maxilla concavity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

poor initial stability - referencing implant diameter

A

wider - usually more stable

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

ISQ scale?

A

ISQ has a non-linear correlation to micro mobility

micro mobility decreases >50% from 60-70 (stability is better closer to 70 +)

low stability i less than 60

higher is greater than 70

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

use of undersized drilling?

A

weak evidence that could enhance the primary implant stability in sites of poor bone density

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

osteotome technique affect?

A

weak evidence that in poor bone density could enhance the primary stability

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

flapless affect?

A

there is weak evidence suggesting that could enhance the primary stability

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

effect of surgical techniwue on the initial stability

A

poor / weak evidence when used undersized drilling, osteotome technique, or flapless technique

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

likely causes of implant exposure

A

thin cortical plate

un-even crestal ridge

too large implant

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

higher chance of implant fracture with?

A

AT THE TIME OF ONSERTION

small diameter nobel biocare trilobed have a higher incidence

more common area – anteiror mandible

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

causes of implant fracture during functino?

A
  1. inadequate fit of the superstructure
  2. material or design defect
  3. long-term metal fatigue
  4. occlusion, parafunctinoal habits
  5. location
  6. diameter
  7. bone resorption around the implant
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

general % of implant fracture

17
Q

main reasons (over arching) that an implant would fracture

A
  1. design and manufacturing defects
  2. non passive fit of the prosthetic framework
  3. physiologic or biomechanical overload
  4. others – localization
    galvanic activity
    iatrogenic implant placement of manipulation
18
Q

implication of implant diameter

A

narrow platform – lower ISQ’s (less stable)

narrow platform – lower ISQ’s

regular and wide showed higher ISQ’s but no significant difference between the two

19
Q

implication of implant length

A

13 mm and 10 mm when compared — in D1 bone – ISQ significantly higher for longer implant length

implants of 13 mm in length – ISQ value were higher in D3 bone than 10 mm

regular platform of 13 mm significantly higher ISQ values compared to 10 mm

20
Q

over-arching themes to poor initial stability

A
  1. over size drilling
  2. under length drilling
  3. perforating cortical plate
  4. changing implant drilling direction
  5. wrong implant drilling system
21
Q

initial stability in D1 bone vs D3

A

will always be different
D1 – higher

also drops off when using narrow platform

22
Q

nerve injury prevelence in implant placement

A

0-11%

- referring to the inferior alveolar nerve

23
Q

inferior alveilar nerve injury with implant placement

A

usually a reslt of poor planning

swelling may have been present around the nerve

poor surgical technique

retraction (like retractor placed against the nerve in mandibular pre-molar region) around mental nerve

with the use of CBCT – incidence of nerve injury should be decreased to a minimm

24
Q

incidence of oro-antral communicatoin

25
risk factors of oro-antral communication
thickness (thinness of sinus membrane) presence of septa sinus width -- angle of medial and lateral walls at the crest
26
signficance between the membrane thickness and membrane perforation with oro-antral communicaton
the perforation rate was 41% when membrane thickness was LESS THAN 1.5 MM perforation rate was 16.6% when membrane thickness i equal or greater than 1.5 mm
27
1.5 mm of membrane thickness?
PERFORATION RATE INCREASED RISK 41% VS 16.6% BELOW AND ABOVE / EQUAL TO 1.5
28
oro-antral communication most commonly seen?
most common in first molar area within the sinus area we see prevelance of middle at 41% posterior at 35% anterior at 24%
29
orientation of sinus septum? / oro-antral communication link
medial-lateral orientation -- HIGHER ON MEDIAL than lateral
30
panorex with oro-antral communication?
can cause up to 21% false diagnosis
31
sinus membrane perforation occurence can increase with?
in cases with SINUS SEPTUM there is a higher incidence of perforation lower incidence if use two window technique lower incidence with ultra-sonic
32
late complications - general
occur AFTER osseointeration
33
implant survival
exhibit characteristics that MAY lead to failure
34
implant failure
implant has LOST osseointegration
35
failing implant
has NOT FULFILLED the predetermine success criteria
36
peri-implantatis
LATE COMPLICATION (after osseointegration) micro-organisms most commonly associated with implant failure are SPIROCHETES AND MOBILE FORMS OF GRAM-NEGATIVE ANAEROBES - bone loss - implant mobility
37
treatment of peri-implantitis
local debridement surface decontamination anti-infective therapy surgical technique removal
38
incidence of implant fracture
2.3% related to - improper treatment planning - bruxism - bone lost