Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

µ¿¿äµµ¸¦ º¸ÀÌ´Â ÀÓÇöõÆ® Á¦°ÅÇÒ °ÍÀΰ¡: Áõ·Êº¸°í

Does mobile implant have to be removed?: case reports

Journal of Dental Implant Research 2013³â 32±Ç 2È£ p.45 ~ 50
À̾çÁø, ±è¿µ±Õ,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
À̾çÁø ( Yi Yang-Jin ) - ºÐ´ç¼­¿ï´ëÇб³º´¿ø Ä¡°ú Ä¡°úº¸Ã¶°ú
±è¿µ±Õ ( Kim Young-Kyun ) - ºÐ´ç¼­¿ï´ëÇб³º´¿ø Ä¡°ú ±¸°­¾Ç¾È¸é¿Ü°ú

Abstract


The aim of this case reports was to present rationale avoiding unnecessary removal of implant based on the experience of treatments of mobilized implants attributable to iatrogenic trauma after insufficient healing. Conventionally fully healed and with high ISQ implants showed rotational mobility and simultaneous pain during impression procedures in the maxilla and the mandible of two sixtieth patients each. Mobilized implants were not removed but screwed back to original position firmly to get primary stability and additional healing time was allowed. Without events, all were re-integrated and functioned successfully 3 years. Within the limitations of short-term clinical reports, although rough surface implant shows rotational mobility during procedures, if it is not in the situation of micromotion and does not show infection sign and peri-implant radiolucency, mobility and pain itself might not result in failure of osseointegration. The most important thing for re-integration is primary stability.

Å°¿öµå

Implant; Insufficient healing; Mobility; Re-integration; Stability

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸