Analysis of HA-coated subperiosteal implants.
Bone atrophy is often encountered in the endentulous patient. With many clinicians performing bone grafting and augmentation techniques, there appears to be a decreased use of the subperiosteal implant modality for prosthetic stabilization. In recent years, there seems to be a decreasing number of literature reports and fewer academic presentations about the subperiosteal implant technique. Additionally, the American Academy of Implant Dentistry deleted this requirement for fellowship in its bylaws at its 1999 annual meeting. The purpose of this paper is to present the success and complication rates of 22 hydroxyapatite-coated subperiosteal implants placed over a 10-year period. Correlations between arch type and full vs unilateral subperiosteal implant cases are analyzed.
Minichetti
John C
JC
Englewood Hospital, Englewood, NJ, USA. dminichett@aol.com
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D020099:Coated Materials, Biocompatible; D016299:Dental Implantation, Subperiosteal / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods; D015921:Dental Implants / Q000009:adverse effects; D017267:Dental Prosthesis Design; D017268:Dental Prosthesis Retention; D019232:Dental Restoration Failure; D017886:Durapatite; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged
D020099:Coated Materials, Biocompatible; D015921:Dental Implants; D017886:Durapatite