[A thought on the future of dental implants].

Y Kobayashi
{"title":"[A thought on the future of dental implants].","authors":"Y Kobayashi","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Presently we are mainly employing into our clinic the Osseointegrated implants as advocated by Dr. Brånemark. Very often general practitioners would ask which implant system is superior when comparing the Osseointegrated implants with apatite implant or ceramic implant which were developed in this country. The main difference between the Osseointegrated implants and all other implants is that the Osseointegrated implants possess the long term basic clinical data obtained objectively, a systemized technique, and the fact that long term safety has been established in edentulous patients. Therefore in order to compare the Osseointegrated implants with appatite implant or ceramic implant it is at the least necessary for the latter two to receive the type of investigation and researches that the Osseointegrated implants has been enjoying for the past 30 years and to possess the long term basic clinical data associated with such researches. With the circumstances as it is when we look into the future of implantology it will not be exaggerating to say that the Osseointegrated implants will dominate the field for the next 20 to 30 years. Thus we would like to limit ourselves to the Osseointegrated implants when we think about the future of implantology from the point view of the practice in prosthodontics. In the field of dental prosthodontics there are numerous areas in which present prosthodontic theories cannot cope with but by employing the Osseointegrated implants relatively high level treatment becomes a reality. Such problem areas include edentulous cases with severe resorbed ridges where treatment with prosthodontics is relatively difficult or edentulous cases with opposing natural dentition. Also treatment of missing tissue either from trauma or from surgery can be performed in a wider range using the Osseointegrated implants. Especially in treating the cleft palate cases which has a high existance rate in our country by using the Osseointegrated implants with attachment denture the number of surgery can be reduced sharply and remarkable recovery with adequate function can be expected. Furthermore treatment of congenital anadontia can not only be made easy but also adequate functional recovery can be expected. In the past for those special cases where orthodontic treatment was considered impossible because of the location of edentulous teeth now by placing fixtures and use them as the anchor teeth one can render orthodontic treatment effectively and yet in a shorter time span.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)</p>","PeriodicalId":76539,"journal":{"name":"Shigaku = Odontology; journal of Nihon Dental College","volume":"77 SPEC","pages":"1246-56"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1989-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Shigaku = Odontology; journal of Nihon Dental College","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Presently we are mainly employing into our clinic the Osseointegrated implants as advocated by Dr. Brånemark. Very often general practitioners would ask which implant system is superior when comparing the Osseointegrated implants with apatite implant or ceramic implant which were developed in this country. The main difference between the Osseointegrated implants and all other implants is that the Osseointegrated implants possess the long term basic clinical data obtained objectively, a systemized technique, and the fact that long term safety has been established in edentulous patients. Therefore in order to compare the Osseointegrated implants with appatite implant or ceramic implant it is at the least necessary for the latter two to receive the type of investigation and researches that the Osseointegrated implants has been enjoying for the past 30 years and to possess the long term basic clinical data associated with such researches. With the circumstances as it is when we look into the future of implantology it will not be exaggerating to say that the Osseointegrated implants will dominate the field for the next 20 to 30 years. Thus we would like to limit ourselves to the Osseointegrated implants when we think about the future of implantology from the point view of the practice in prosthodontics. In the field of dental prosthodontics there are numerous areas in which present prosthodontic theories cannot cope with but by employing the Osseointegrated implants relatively high level treatment becomes a reality. Such problem areas include edentulous cases with severe resorbed ridges where treatment with prosthodontics is relatively difficult or edentulous cases with opposing natural dentition. Also treatment of missing tissue either from trauma or from surgery can be performed in a wider range using the Osseointegrated implants. Especially in treating the cleft palate cases which has a high existance rate in our country by using the Osseointegrated implants with attachment denture the number of surgery can be reduced sharply and remarkable recovery with adequate function can be expected. Furthermore treatment of congenital anadontia can not only be made easy but also adequate functional recovery can be expected. In the past for those special cases where orthodontic treatment was considered impossible because of the location of edentulous teeth now by placing fixtures and use them as the anchor teeth one can render orthodontic treatment effectively and yet in a shorter time span.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

[对未来种植牙的思考]。
目前,我们的诊所主要采用bramatnemark博士倡导的骨整合种植体。通常全科医生会问,在比较国内开发的骨整合种植体与磷灰石种植体或陶瓷种植体时,哪个种植体系统更好。骨结合种植体与其他种植体的主要区别在于,骨结合种植体具有长期客观获得的基本临床数据,具有系统化的技术,并且在无牙患者中具有长期的安全性。因此,为了将骨结合种植体与磷灰体种植体或陶瓷种植体进行比较,后两者至少需要接受过去30年来骨结合种植体所享受的那种调查和研究,并拥有与此类研究相关的长期基础临床数据。在这种情况下,当我们展望未来的种植技术时,毫不夸张地说,骨整合种植体将在未来20到30年占据主导地位。因此,当我们从口腔修复实践的角度思考种植学的未来时,我们希望将自己限制在骨整合种植体上。在口腔修复领域,有许多领域目前的修复理论无法应付,但采用骨结合种植体相对高水平的治疗成为现实。这些问题领域包括有严重牙嵴吸收的无牙病例,用修复术治疗相对困难或有相反天然牙列的无牙病例。此外,使用骨整合植入物可以在更大范围内治疗创伤或手术造成的组织缺失。特别是在治疗我国腭裂发生率较高的腭裂病例中,采用骨结合种植体配合附着义齿,可大大减少手术次数,并可获得良好的功能恢复。此外,先天性先天性先天性残疾的治疗不仅容易,而且可以预期充分的功能恢复。在过去,对于那些由于无牙的位置而被认为不可能进行正畸治疗的特殊情况,现在通过放置固定装置并使用它们作为锚牙,可以在更短的时间内有效地进行正畸治疗。(摘要删节为400字)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信