ORIGINAL ARTICLE   

Minerva Dental and Oral Science 2022 February;71(1):25-30

DOI: 10.23736/S2724-6329.21.04544-7

Copyright © 2021 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

The use of monophasic implants as an alternative of implant-prosthetic rehabilitation in the posterior maxilla with no sinus lift

Agron METO ¹, Merita BARDHOSHI ², Emiljano TRAGAJ ¹, Estela HALIMI ¹, Edit XHAJANKA ³, Gabriele CERVINO ⁴, Cesare D’AMICO ⁴, Luca FIORILLO ^{4, 5} ✉, Aida METO ⁶

¹ Department of Implantology, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Aldent, Tirana, Albania; ² Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dental Medicine, University of Medicine, Tirana, Albania; ³ Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dental Medicine, University of Medicine, Tirana, Albania; ⁴ Department of Biomedical and Dental Sciences, Morphological and Functional Images, University of Messina, Messina, Italy; ⁵ Multidisciplinary Department of Medical-Surgical and Odontostomatological Specialties, Luigi Vanvitelli University of Campania, Naples, Italy; ⁶ Department of Dental Therapy, Faculty of Dental Medicine, University of Medicine, Tirana, Albania

BACKGROUND: Over the years, numerous studies and advanced technologies about dental implants have been evolved from the traditional two-stage procedure to immediate loading. Implants located in the posterior maxillary region allow to achieve an appropriate prosthetic support. The aim of this work was to solve the atrophied posterior maxilla, through monophasic implants with flapless technique and intraoral electro-welding.
METHODS: In this study were enrolled 120 patients between 20 and 68 years old (mean age of 34.2 years), where females predominate with 53.1% compared to 46.9% males. The patients were presented at the Oral Surgery Clinic of the Aldent University (Tirana, Albania), for a period 2009-2019. Briefly, 310 monophasic implants were placed, TRAMONTE type (Milan, Italy), to the posterior maxilla thus avoiding the sinus, with dense and wide threads, of different lengths and widths. The surgical technique was minimally invasive, flapless one. Data were expressed as mean + standard error (SEM) of all the radiographic outcomes obtained; and as statistical analysis was used the Student’s t-test. P<0.5 and P<0.05, were considered significant.
RESULTS: A part of the patients were hypertensive and type 2 diabetic, then a negligible part were smokers, also a lack of oral hygiene was observed in 40% of cases. After 5 years of observation, it appeared that 95.9% of the implants were successful. Furthermore, the mesial and distal bone loss during the first three years was 0.1 mm, while after 5 years no continuation of bone loss was observed.
CONCLUSIONS: The application of monophasic implants must be performed according to approved protocols, considering the conditions of the posterior maxillary region, obtaining in this way a safe dental implantation.

KEY WORDS: Dental implants; Osseointegration; Immediate dental implant loading