As the world is embracing technology, dental technology is merging with artificial intelligence. Dentists are striving to perfect the art of placing dental implants. Implants for the rehabilitation and retention of dental and facial prostheses have graduated from a phase of wishful thinking to one of the most gratifying experiences for patients and treating fraternity alike. Implants and restorations supported by implants have a good long-term survival percentage. Complications and implant failure, which can still happen, are seen by many clinicians as significant barriers to implant treatment. Implant therapy still involves a biological healing and integration process despite recent advancements. These biological processes are complex and may be hampered by local or systemic factors, which could result in problems and implant failure. For the implant surgeon and dental professional, it is crucial to manage patients who have certain risk factors and be able to address potential complications and failure. The aim of this article is to discuss frequent complications of implant failure and its management and help clinicians in placing and restoring implants less painfully and vicariously receive some valuable experience.

Anchorage has been a vital topic since the origin of orthodontics. In the orthodontic process, gentle, constant pressure is applied to the teeth that need to be moved against the other teeth, which serve as the anchoring unit. The anchoring teeth must be completely stable. The introduction of temporary anchorage devices to the orthodontic field has made it possible to overcome conventional anchorage and its limitations. Mini implants have widened the horizon of the orthodontic field. Skeletal anchorage has, to a large degree, replaced conventional anchorage in a situation where anchorage is considered either critical, insufficient, or likely to result in undesirable side effects such as vertical displacements generated by intermaxillary force systems. Over the last few years, anchorage control with mini-implants has acquired plenty of significance in the clinical management of orthodontic patients. The mode of anchorage facilitated by these implant systems has a unique characteristic owing to their temporary use, which results in a transient, albeit absolute anchorage. The foregoing properties, together with the recently achieved simple application of these screws, have increased their popularity, establishing them as a necessary treatment option in complex cases that would have otherwise been impossible to treat. This comprehensive review aims to present and discuss the historical view, clinical uses, benefits, and drawbacks of the mini-screw implants used to obtain a temporary anchorage for orthodontic applications. Topics to be discussed include classification, types and properties, types of screw, head, and thread, their clinical applications, sites, and placement method selection.

One of the most popular treatment modalities in routine implantology practice is extraction followed by immediate or delayed implant insertion. Teeth removal alone is insufficient, particularly in the maxillary anterior region of the jaw. Patients may experience several issues after tooth extractions. Due to trauma and the loss of periodontal ligaments, post-extraction alveolar ridge resorption cannot be prevented. Atraumatic extraction, socket preservation, grafting, and implant placement immediately after the extraction are some of the procedures that are carried out to minimize or prevent the resorption of alveolar bone. Osseointegration is essential for keeping the clinical effectiveness of dental implants. If the supporting tissues at an implant site resorb and are worsened by risk factors for recession, there may be considerable esthetic and functional failure. Implant placement at the retained root structure preserves the buccal bone resulting in an excellent emergence profile. Resorption in the posterior alveolar ridge may result in a decrease in attached keratinized tissue and a decrease in vestibular depth. This might have a negative impact on the stability of the implant and leads to peri-implantitis resulting in the failure of the implant. Without papilla loss or arch collapse, partial extraction therapy has resulted in effective esthetic outcomes. The socket shield technique is a minimally invasive surgical procedure that helps to maintain both soft and hard tissues by preserving a small section of the root. It lessens the necessity for surgeries on bone and mucogingival grafts, cutting the length of the overall recovery process and reducing the treatment time. When soft and hard tissue grafts are used to fill the socket before applying pressure with pontics, it is known as the pontic shield procedure. However, there is no published study that explains partial extraction therapy in a straightforward and clear manner that can guide a practitioner in determining a shield design with a proven track record of success. This review article focuses on the partial extraction procedure which is very helpful for preserving soft and hard tissues in cases involving immediate implant insertion postextraction. It has long-term therapeutic success with implant and pontic therapy. This review article will also be helpful for clinicians to understand shield design in different case scenarios and help to learn stepwise procedures carried out in partial extraction therapy.