EN
DE
FR
IT
RU
ES
PT
Delayed implant placement with GBR and soft tissue augmentation at the aesthetic area - 2 years follow up – Dr. H. Maghaireh & Dr. V. Ivancheva
-
01/20 - Initial situation - broken and missing upper right central incisor (UR1). This tooth was removed long time ago and there were signs of bone loss and resorption due to the bone remodelling. Patient was also undergoing orthodontic treatment due to the loss of mesio-distal space.
Delayed implant placement with GBR and soft tissue augmentation at the aesthetic area - 2 years follow up – Dr. H. Maghaireh & Dr. V. Ivancheva -
02/20 - Guided bone regeneration after implant placement using Jason® membrane with good pin stabilisation.
Delayed implant placement with GBR and soft tissue augmentation at the aesthetic area - 2 years follow up – Dr. H. Maghaireh & Dr. V. Ivancheva -
03/20 - Exposed implant threads covered with a thin layer of autogenous bone chips harvested during implant bed preparation.
Delayed implant placement with GBR and soft tissue augmentation at the aesthetic area - 2 years follow up – Dr. H. Maghaireh & Dr. V. Ivancheva -
04/20 - Bone volume augmentation was conducted with maxgraft® (<2 mm mm of 0.5 cc) mixed with cerabone® (0.5- 1.0 mm) 4:1 shaped to create convexity.
Delayed implant placement with GBR and soft tissue augmentation at the aesthetic area - 2 years follow up – Dr. H. Maghaireh & Dr. V. Ivancheva -
05/20 - Stabilisation of Jason® membrane using additional titanium pins.
Delayed implant placement with GBR and soft tissue augmentation at the aesthetic area - 2 years follow up – Dr. H. Maghaireh & Dr. V. Ivancheva -
06/20 - Grafting site was covered by two mucoderm® (15x20mm) used as a soft tissue graft as well as a membrane over Jason® membrane . mucoderm® was stabilised with sutures on each side.
Delayed implant placement with GBR and soft tissue augmentation at the aesthetic area - 2 years follow up – Dr. H. Maghaireh & Dr. V. Ivancheva -
07/20 - Modified sling suture used to stabilise mucoderm® .
Delayed implant placement with GBR and soft tissue augmentation at the aesthetic area - 2 years follow up – Dr. H. Maghaireh & Dr. V. Ivancheva -
08/20 - Wound closure without tension and without having to make extra incisions.
Delayed implant placement with GBR and soft tissue augmentation at the aesthetic area - 2 years follow up – Dr. H. Maghaireh & Dr. V. Ivancheva -
09/20 - Wound closure without tension and without having to make extra incisions.
Delayed implant placement with GBR and soft tissue augmentation at the aesthetic area - 2 years follow up – Dr. H. Maghaireh & Dr. V. Ivancheva -
10/20 - Healing stage 8 weeks after surgery - healing abutment partly exposed. Sutures were removed 2 weeks after implant and bone graft surgery.
Delayed implant placement with GBR and soft tissue augmentation at the aesthetic area - 2 years follow up – Dr. H. Maghaireh & Dr. V. Ivancheva -
11/20 - Healing stage 8 weeks after surgery - healing abutment partly exposed.
Delayed implant placement with GBR and soft tissue augmentation at the aesthetic area - 2 years follow up – Dr. H. Maghaireh & Dr. V. Ivancheva -
12/20 - First impression stage for temporary screw retained implant crown 16 weeks after surgery.
Delayed implant placement with GBR and soft tissue augmentation at the aesthetic area - 2 years follow up – Dr. H. Maghaireh & Dr. V. Ivancheva -
13/20 - Fit of the temporary screw retained implant bridge 18 weeks after implant placement surgery.
Delayed implant placement with GBR and soft tissue augmentation at the aesthetic area - 2 years follow up – Dr. H. Maghaireh & Dr. V. Ivancheva -
14/20 - Gingival zenith and soft tissue contour 5 weeks with the temporary crown.
Delayed implant placement with GBR and soft tissue augmentation at the aesthetic area - 2 years follow up – Dr. H. Maghaireh & Dr. V. Ivancheva -
15/20 - Gingival zenith and soft tissue contour 5 weeks with the temporary crown.
Delayed implant placement with GBR and soft tissue augmentation at the aesthetic area - 2 years follow up – Dr. H. Maghaireh & Dr. V. Ivancheva -
16/20 - Final result 3 months after surgery and 2 weeks after final prosthetic integration.
Delayed implant placement with GBR and soft tissue augmentation at the aesthetic area - 2 years follow up – Dr. H. Maghaireh & Dr. V. Ivancheva -
17/20 - Final result 3 months after surgery and 2 weeks after final prosthetic integration.
Delayed implant placement with GBR and soft tissue augmentation at the aesthetic area - 2 years follow up – Dr. H. Maghaireh & Dr. V. Ivancheva -
18/20 - Smile line and harmonisation of white and pink aesthetic.
Delayed implant placement with GBR and soft tissue augmentation at the aesthetic area - 2 years follow up – Dr. H. Maghaireh & Dr. V. Ivancheva -
19/20 - Smile line and harmonisation of white and pink aesthetic.
Delayed implant placement with GBR and soft tissue augmentation at the aesthetic area - 2 years follow up – Dr. H. Maghaireh & Dr. V. Ivancheva -
20/20 - Two Years follow up
Delayed implant placement with GBR and soft tissue augmentation at the aesthetic area - 2 years follow up – Dr. H. Maghaireh & Dr. V. Ivancheva
Baseline clinical situation.
Situation before extraction of the teeth
Initial clinical situation
Initial situation after extraction of tooth 21 after 6 months
Preparation of a single tooth defect with severely resorbed vestibular wall
Initial clinical situation.
Initial clinical situation
Tooth 16 furcation involvement with gingival marginal recession and large Class 5 filling
Initial x-ray, ten years post implantationem alio loco, large peri-implant bone loss
Extraction socket with bone wall defect
Situation before tooth extraction
Initial clinical situation
Initial X-ray presenting a very deep intrabony defect of tooth 21
Implant placed in the deficient site. permamem® in place for covering.
Initial situation – Treatment plan: Replace the adhesive upper left central incisor bridge with a dental implant
Occlusal view of attached maxgraft® cortico at the buccal site
Initial x-ray, tooth 25 compromised and to be extracted
Clinical situation at baseline: Situation after tooth extraction UR1 due to a failed endodontic treatment 3 months previously
Alveolar socket before soft and hard tissue augmentation
Pre-operative situation; tooth 21 proved not to be worth preserving
Initial clinical situation: 9 mm pocket depth associated with root fracture
Initial situation - A young female 34 years old lost her front teeth in an surfing accident and she had a 5 unit bridge supported by her upper left lateral and right canine. The restoration failed and both supporting crowns have exposed and leaking margins.
Initial situation - endodontically failing tooth 22, very thin biotype, high lip line and esthetic expectations
Preoperative x-ray, severe bone atrophy
Initial situation - broken and missing upper right central incisor (UR1). This tooth was removed long time ago and there were signs of bone loss and resorption due to the bone remodelling. Patient was also undergoing orthodontic treatment due to the loss of mesio-distal space.
