We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants
Login:
username:

password:

Plattform:

Forgotten password?

Registration

Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 15 (2000), No. 3     15. June 2000
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 15 (2000), No. 3  (15.06.2000)

Page 405-414


Tilting of Posterior Mandibular and Maxillary Implants for Improved Prosthesis Support
Krekmanov, Leonard / Kahn, Mikael / Rangert, Bo / Lindström, Håkan
Rehabilitation of atrophied edentulous arches with endosseous implants in the posterior regions is often associated with anatomic problems such as jaw shape and location of the mental loop, mandibular canal, and maxillary sinuses. The purpose of this investigation was to modify the method for implant placement in the posterior part of the jaws to extend fixed implant-connected prostheses further distally, and to reduce the length of cantilevers in complete-arch prostheses without transpositioning the mandibular nerve or performing bone grafting in the maxilla. Forty-seven consecutive patients were treated with implants (25 patients/36 mandibular implants, 22 patients/30 maxillary implants) placed in tilted positions. They were followed a mean of 40 months (mandibles) and 53 months (maxillae). In the mandible, implants close to the mental foramina were tilted posteriorly approximately 25 to 35 degrees. In the maxilla, the posterior implants were placed close to and parallel with the sinus walls and were titled anteriorly/posteriorly approximately 30 to 35 degrees. Patients gained a mean distance of 6.5 mm of prosthesis support in the mandible and 9.3 mm in the maxilla, as a result of implant tilting. There were no implant failures in mandibles. The cumulative success rates in the maxilla at 5 years were 98% for tilted implants and 93% for non-tilted implants. Paresthesias of the mental nerve were observed on 4 sides during the first 2 to 3 weeks after implant placement. Analysis of the load distribution in one mandibular case showed no significant difference between tilted and the non-tilted implants, and the improved prosthesis support was confirmed. Satisfactory medium-term results concerning osseointegration and significant extension of prosthesis support show that the method can be recommended. This technique may allow for longer implants to be placed with improved bone anchorage.

Keywords: edentulous jaw, endosseous dental implantation, implant-supported dental prosthesis, maxillary sinus, mandibular nerve