Modern implant dentistry based on osseointegration: 50 years of progress, current trends and open questions

In the 1960s and 1970s, implant‐supported prostheses based on subperiosteal or blade implants had a poor reputation because of questionable clinical outcomes and lack of scientific documentation. The change to a scientifically sound discipline was initiated by the two scientific pioneers of modern i...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Periodontology 2000 2017-02, Vol.73 (1), p.7-21
Hauptverfasser: Buser, Daniel, Sennerby, Lars, De Bruyn, Hugo
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:In the 1960s and 1970s, implant‐supported prostheses based on subperiosteal or blade implants had a poor reputation because of questionable clinical outcomes and lack of scientific documentation. The change to a scientifically sound discipline was initiated by the two scientific pioneers of modern implant dentistry, Professor P. I. Brånemark from the University of Gothenburg in Sweden and Professor André Schroeder from the University of Bern in Switzerland. Together with their teams, and independently of each other, they laid the foundation for the most significant development and paradigm shift in dental medicine. The present volume of Periodontology 2000 celebrates 50 years of osseointegration. It reviews the progress of implant therapy over the past 50 years, including the basics of implant surgery required to achieve osseointegration on a predictable basis and evolving innovations. The development of bone‐augmentation techniques, such as guided bone regeneration and sinus floor elevation, to correct local bone defects at potential implant sites has increased the indications for implant therapy. The paradigm shift to moderately rough implant surfaces resulted in faster and enhanced bone integration and led to improvements in various treatment protocols, such as immediate and early implant placement in postextraction sites, and made various loading protocols possible, including immediate and early implant loading. In the past 15 years, preoperative analysis and presurgical planning improved as a result of the introduction of three‐dimensional imaging techniques. Hereby, cone‐beam computed tomography offers better image quality with reduced radiation exposure, when compared with dental computed tomography. This opened the door for digital planning and surgical modifications. Over the last 50 years this evolution has facilitated tremendous progress in esthetic outcomes with implant‐supported prostheses and improved patient‐centered outcomes. This volume of Periodontology 2000 also discusses the current trends and open questions of implant dentistry, such as the potential of digital implant dentistry in the surgical and prosthetic field, the trend for an increasing average age of implant patients and the related adaptations of treatment protocols, and the second attempt to establish ceramic implants using, this time, zirconia as the implant material. Finally, some of the hottest controversies are discussed, such as recent suggestions on bone integration bei
ISSN:0906-6713
1600-0757
DOI:10.1111/prd.12185