PHOTOFUNCTIONALIZED IMPLANTS IN MAXILLARY REHABILITATION AFTER GBR - CASE REPORT

CASE PRESENTATION: Paziete di anni 58 uomo, con edentulia parziale II settore sede di pregressa GBR eseguita 9 mesi prima. Si posizionano n° 3 impianti posiziona 2.2 – 2.3 – 2.5 (3.5 x 11 mm in sede 2.2. e 2.3. e 4,5 x 11.5 in sede 25). Due dei tre impianti inseriti sono stati fotofunzionalizzati mediante trattamento con UV per 15 minuti immediatamente prima dell’inserimento degli stessi (ushio super osseo brochure). Si è proceduto La velocità di osteointegrazione è stata calcolata misurando l’aumento ISQ (quoziente stabilità implantare) settimanalmente ,dal posizionamento degli impianti ,fino al terzo mese attraverso l’ausilio del osstell (brochure). Thirty-three implants (7 patients) placed in the maxilla and immediate loaded were evaluated. Photofunctionalization was performed by treating implants with ultraviolet for 15 minutes immediately before placement. Implant stability was assessed by measuring the implant stability quotient (ISQ) weekly starting from implant placement up to 3 months. Osseointegration speed index (OSI), defined as ISQ increase per month, was also evaluated. The average ISQ for photofunctionalized implants at week 6 was 78.0, which was considerably higher than the average ISQ of 66.1, reported in literature for various as-received implants after a longer healing time of 2 to 6 months. No stability dip was observed for photofunctionalized implants regardless of the initial ISQ values. The OSI for photofunctionalized implants was 6.3 and 3.1 when their initial ISQ was 65 to 70 and 71 to 75, respectively, whereas the OSI values for as-received implants calculated from literature ranged from -3.0 to 1.17 with an average of -0.10.