Please activate JavaScript!
Please install Adobe Flash Player, click here for download
ePaper created 2017-04-20, 12:07:17 | version 1.38.0
implants_one-piece implants remembering, according to present law, obliged by means and not by results. In the post-surgical phase, the digital ortho- pantomography is the main diagnostic exam for the patient’s follow-up in time, because of its low dose exposure, the panoramic vision of all the masticatory apparatus, its ease of execution and the ample possibility of re-elaborating the images. And now let’s move into a more technical ield. We have already said that one of the most frequent negative events observed by x-rays, in ading surgery the pre-implant conoid reabsorp- tion is less frequent due to a better distribution of stress around the implant.13 We also believe that with immediate loading bone reabsorption occurs more rarely. In fact in the x-ray documen- tation at 18-24 months only 1/4 of our patients who had been rehabilitated in immediate loading developed alveolar bone retraction, while in the patients who were treated with difered loading, the incidence of bone retraction was seen in ¾ of the cases. Such an evident and marked diference merits further study. We have therefore develo- ped models with inite elements, based on our Fig. 7_The Canine Pillar and the tuber represent an excellent surgical resource for one-piece implants. Ryc. 7b Ryc. 7a Ryc. 7c Ryc. 7d Ryc. 8a Fig. 8a_The morphology of one-piece implants allow, after a careful diagnostic check-up, for the delicate periforaminal zone to be exploited. b. Mono- phase implants and a Scialom needle, post extraction, welded and immediately functionalized. Check-up after 9 years. 50 4_2016 50 implants Ryc. 8b Ryc. 8c Ryc. 8c Ryc. 8c the check-up following the insertion of the im- plant, is the pre-implant conoid bone reabsorp- tion. As well as some classic theories, which see bacterial infection as being the main cause of such reabsorption, today it seems much more likely that the biomechanical factor is the main cause due to its etiological prevalence. Recently, many authors have illustrated that, unlike two-phase implantology, in immediate lo- cases, evaluating the behavior of a single implant and those linked by a welded bar (Fig. 13). From our studies, the biomechanical element (that is, functional stress) reveals itself to be the main etiological factor in pre-implant bone absorption. The diference in behavior between implants in immediate or deferred loading can be ex- plained mainly by the distribution of stress in the