Royal Initiative Dental Implant Project, A Case Report

Authors

  • Thanwit Sukcharoen DDS., Division of Dentistry Nakhon Pathom Hospital Nakhon Pathom

Keywords:

dental implant, implant-retained overdenture, alveolar bone loss

Abstract

A 64-year-old Thai female had experienced unsatisfied of wearing complete dentures that was due to problem of easily dislodgement of the lower denture caused by poor retention and stability. Two dental implants were placed in anterior portion of the mandible to stabilize the lower denture. The patient has been satisfied since then the improvement of mastication and quality of life. However, cooperation in maintenance, especially every day cleaning has led the achievement and longevity of dental implants. This article demonstrates the 9-year utilization of dental implants in mandible, and comparison techniques of the stability of dental implants which could be applied to other patient.

References

1. Batenburg RH, Raghoebar GM, Van Oort RP, et al. Mandibular overdentures supported by two or four endosteal implants. A prospective, comparative study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1998; 27(6): 435–9.

2. Wood MR, Vermilyea SG, Committee on Research in Fixed Prosthodontics of the Academy of Fixed Prosthodontics. A review of selected dental literature on evidencebased treatment planning for dental implants: report of the Committee on Research in Fixed Prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent. 2004; 92(5): 447-62.

3. Moy PK, Medina D, Shetty V, et al. Dental implant failure rates and associated risk factors. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2005; 20(4): 569-77.

4. Meijer HJ, Batenburg RH, Raghoebar GM. Influence of patient age on the success rate of dental implants supporting an overdenture in an edentulous mandible: a 3-year prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2001;16:522-6
5. Renouard F, Rangert B. General risk factors. In: Risk factors in implant dentistry: simplified clinical analysis for predictable treatment, second edition. Paris: Quintessence International; 2008. 118.

6. Cunha-Cruz J, Hujoel PP, Nadanovsky P. Secular trends in socioeconomic disparities in edentulism: USA, 1972–2001. J Dent Res. 2007; 86(2): 131–6.

7. Skak SV, Jensen TT. Femoral shaft fracture in 265 children.Lognormal correlation with age of speed of healing. Acta Orthop Scand. 1988; 59: 704-7.

8. Mombelli A, Lang NP. The diagnosis and treatment of peri-implantitis. Periodontol 2000. 1998; 17: 63-76.

9. Berglundh T, Persson L, Klinge B. A systematic review of the incidence of biological and technical complications in implant dentistry reported in prospective longitudinal studies of at least 5 years. J Clin Periodontol. 2002; 29 suppl 3: 197-212.

10. Albrektsson T, Zarb G, Worthington P, et al. The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1986; 1(1): 11-25.

11. Fourmousis I, Bragger U. Radiologic interpretation of peri-implant structures. In: Lang NP, Karring T, Lindhe J, eds. Proceedings of the Third European Workshop on Periodontology. Berlin: Quintessenz; 1999: 228-41.

12. Oh TJ, Yoon J, Misch CE, et al. The causes of early implant bone loss: myth or science? J Periodontol. 2002; 73(3): 322-33.

13. Wennstrom JL, Palmer RM. Consensus report of session C. In: Lang NP, Karring T, Lindhe J, eds. Proceedings of the 3rd European Workshop on Periodntology. Berlin: Quintessenz; 1999: 255-9.

14. Worthington P, Bolender CL, Taylor TD. The Swedish system of osseointegrated implants: problems and complications encountered during a 4-year trial period. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1987; 2(2): 77-84.

Downloads

Published

2020-06-29

How to Cite

1.
Sukcharoen DDS., T. Royal Initiative Dental Implant Project, A Case Report. Reg 4-5 Med J [internet]. 2020 Jun. 29 [cited 2025 Dec. 31];39(2):280. available from: https://he02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/reg45/article/view/242880