All-on-4
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The term All-On-4 refers to “all” teeth being supported “on four” dental implants, a prosthodontics[1][2] procedure for total rehabilitation of the edentulous patient or for patients with badly broken down teeth, decayed teeth or compromised teeth due to gum disease. It consists of the rehabilitation of either edentulous or dentate maxilla and/or mandible with fixedprosthesis by placing four implants in the anterior maxilla, where bone density is higher. The four implants support a fixed prosthesis with 10 to 14 teeth and it is placed immediately, typically within 24 hours of surgery.
Implant manufacturer Nobel Biocare were among the first to identify the evolution of All-on-4 technique as a potential valid and cost-effective alternative to conventional implant techniques, and funded studies by Portuguese dentist Paulo Maló[3][4] to determine the efficacy of this approach. During this time this technique was also used by various other clinicians around the world.
All-On-4 is not an invention, but rather a treatment technique that has evolved over time and has the following features:
- four dental implants to support a full fixed bridge (documented since 1977[5]);
- the use of angulated implants in the back to overcome bony deficiencies or anatomical structures (documented since 1990[6]);
- immediate loading (documented since 1990[7]).
The concept itself of the total rehabilitation of a full set of teeth supported by as few as four fixtures was not a new one. Professor P-I Branemark,[5] who discovered osseointegration, published numerous articles in the 1970s with successful rehabilitation of a full arch supported by this number of fixtures. However it was the angulation of the back implants that has led to today’s All-On-4, and has been trialed by numerous clinicians simultaneously in the USA, Sweden, Portugal, and South America in the 1990s. The technique evolved when in an attempt to avoid certain anatomical limitations typically seen in the back of the upper and lower jaws have, clinicians successfully avoided bone-deficient areas with the use of angulated implants. Anatomical limitations are more prevalent in patients with full dentures, and once the back implants are placed at an angle there is often only enough room left for two more implants in the front. This has led to the use of only four fixtures to support a full set of teeth.
Contents
[hide]Description of the procedure
The All-on-4 treatment concept is a prosthodontic procedure (i.e replacement of missing teeth) that provides a permanent, screw-retained, same-day replacement for the entire upper and / or lower set of teeth with a bridge or denture. The procedure is best for patients with significant tooth loss or decay and for people whose bone loss in the jaw area prevents them from getting conventionally oriented (vertical) dental implants. Often, tooth loss is accompanied by loss of the jaw bone which poses the problem of reconstruction of the jaw bone requiring bone grafting. The All-On-4 protocol is considered to be a graftless solution thereby avoiding the long and costly road of rebuilding bone when conventionally oriented implants are used. For the implementation to be successful a careful analysis of the bone structure needs to be made. The most ideal way to evaluate the bone is by a CBCT scan. The All-On-4 protocol is for at least 4 implants to be placed in a jaw. The back implants are typically angled approximately 30 to 45 degrees from the biting plane. The implant is placed in front of the maxillary sinus in the upper jaw (maxilla) and in front of the mental nerve in the lower jaw (mandible). The head of the implant emerges in approximately the second premolar position. This will allow a molar tooth to be cantilevered posterior resulting in a denture or bridge with approximately 12 teeth.
The All-on-4 treatment concept owes its name to the very nature of the method, which consists of applying a dental prosthesis with at least twelve teeth (bridge) fixed in the jaw, based only on four titanium implants.[4]
Patent claims for the dental implant fixation
There is no patent for the All-On-4 technique.
Price of the treatment
The price may vary for each country or region, and normally it is divided in two phases. The usual price in the United States is described below:
- The surgical component of removing any compromised remaining teeth, and placing the four dental implants may cost between $12,000 and $15,000 per jaw
- The restorative component involving the connection of the teeth may cost between $7,000 and $10,000 per jaw, dependent on the materials used and the type of teeth (porcelain or acrylic).
- There are usually additional costs such as the cost of anesthesia as the dental implants are typically placed under IV sedation.
The total price (if both upper jaw and lower jaw are considered) could possibly reach US$57,000. Clinics with suitable facilities, which are able to offer the entire treatment in the one place, and who do these procedures regularly, are typically the most cost-effective.
In Europe, price for All-on-four is much lower than in the United States.
See also
References
- Patzelt SB, Bahat O, Reynolds MA, Strub JR (April 2013). "The All-on-Four Treatment Concept: A Systematic Review". PubMed.
- Zhao X, DI P, Lin Y, Li JH, Qiu LX, Luo J, Cui HY (October 2014). "Implanting the edentulous jaws with "All-on-4" immediate reconstruction: a preliminary clinical observation". PubMed.
- Maló, Paulo; Rangert, Bo; Nobre, Miguel (2003). "'All-on-Four' Immediate-Function Concept with Brånemark System Implants for Completely Edentulous Mandibles: A Retrospective Clinical Study". Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research. 5: 2–9. doi:10.1111/j.1708-8208.2003.tb00010.x.PMID 12691645.
- Malo, Paulo; Rangert, Bo; Nobre, Miguel (2005). "All-on-4 Immediate-Function Concept with Brånemark System Implants for Completely Edentulous Maxillae: A 1-Year Retrospective Clinical Study". Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research. 7: S88–94. doi:10.1111/j.1708-8208.2005.tb00080.x.PMID 16137093.
- Branemark, Per-Ingvar (1977). Osseointegrated Implants in the Treatment of the Edentulous Jaw. Sweden: Almquivist & Weksell International. pp. 79, 81, 83.ISBN 91-22-00128-X.
- Kallus, T (Spring 1990). "Clinical evaluation of angulated abutments for the Brånemark system: a pilot study.". Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants.PMID 2202668.
- Lefkove, MD (1990). "Immediate loading of cylinder implants with overdentures in the mandibular symphysis: the titanium plasma-sprayed screw technique.". J Oral Implantol. PMID 2098572.
- This page was last modified on 14 October 2016, at 08:50.
- Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use andPrivacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
The NobelGuide® All-on-4® Treatment Concept for Rehabilitation of Edentulous Jaws: A Retrospective Report on the 7-Years Clinical and 5-Years Radiographic Outcomes:
Abstract
Background
There is a necessity of studies documenting the long-term outcome of full-arch flapless rehabilitations.
Purpose
To evaluate the 7 years implant and prosthesis survival rate and 5-years marginal bone loss of full-arch fixed prosthetic rehabilitations supported by implants in immediate function with the All-on-4® treatment concept using a computer guided surgical protocol (NobelGuide®, Nobel Biocare).
Materials and Methods
This retrospective clinical study included 111 edentulous patients (n = 53 bruxers; n = 21 smokers; n = 59 systemically compromised), rehabilitated between February 2005 and November 2010 with 532 implants with the All-on-4® treatment concept using NobelGuide®. Outcome measures were implant and prosthesis survival, marginal bone loss at 5-years and the incidence of mechanical and biological complications. Survival was calculated using life-table analysis. Inferential analysis was performed to compare the difference in marginal bone loss between axial and tilted implants.
Results
Sixteen patients were lost to follow-up. The implant cumulative survival rate was 94.5% at 7 years. Prosthetic survival was 97.8% (n = 3 prosthetic failures). The average (standard deviation) marginal bone loss at 5 years was 1.3 mm (1.06 mm) overall, 1.27 mm (1.02 mm) for tilted implants and 1.34 mm (1.1 mm) for axial implants (p < .001). Ninety-one patients experienced complications in the provisional prostheses (n = 47 patients who were bruxers; n = 25 patients with implant-supported rehabilitation as opposing dentition) ranging from prosthetic fracture (n = 66 patients) to abutment or prosthetic screw loosening (n = 74 patients). Thirty-three patients experienced complications in the definitive prostheses (all exclusive to patients who were bruxers or had implant-supported rehabilitations as opposing dentition) ranging from acrylic-resin prosthetic/crown fracture (n = 23 patients) to abutment or prosthetic screw loosening (n = 10 patients). Twenty-five patients (22%) registered peri-implant pathology.
Conclusions
Within the limitations of this study, it is possible to conclude that this treatment modality for completely edentulous jaws is possible with high long-term survival outcomes. Bruxing and smoking habits had a negative impact on implant failure, mechanical, and biological complications.
http://ift.tt/2ejVTzM
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου