Osseointegrated implants and orbital defects: U.C.L.A. experience

Nishimura, Robert N.; Roumanas, Eleni; Moy, Peter K.; Sugai, Toshiro; Freymiller, Earl

doi:10.1016/s0022-3913(98)70242-2

Cited by 73 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the two metals have different physical characteristics: pure Ti is inferior to Ti6Al4V in strength. In recent years, dental implants have been used not only for support of single teeth 23) but also for support of partial dentures, 24) support for reconstruction of the entire dental arch, 25) support of complete dentures, 26) as structures penetrating the mucosa for support for the reconstruction of maxillofacial defects, 27,28) and for treatment allowing oral, cranial, and facial reconstruction. To avoid clinical fracture of pure titanium implants, 29,30) mechanical properties appropriate for implantation are required for long-term functioning of the implant materials in vivo.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Bone Mineral Density and Area of Newly Formed Bone Around Ti-15%Zr-4%Nb-4%Ta Alloy and Ti-6%Al-4%V Alloy Implants

Numata

Tanaka

Okazaki

et al. 2008

J. Hard Tissue Biology.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:A newly developed titanium alloy, Ti-15%Zr-4%Nb-4%Ta (Ti15Zr4Nb4Ta), has been shown to have excellent mechanical characteristics, corrosion fatigue strength, anticorrosion, cytocompatibility, and biocompatibility. The purpose of this study was to compare the bone mineral density (BMD) and area of newly formed bone around Ti15Zr4Nb4Ta implants to that around Ti-6%Al-4%V alloy (Ti6Al4V) implants. We inserted 2 types of implants (surface treat of the machine and the blast implant) in New Zealand white rabbit femurs under general anesthesia. The rabbit was done perfusion fixation of 4, 8, 16, 24, and 48 weeks later, and the femurs with the implants were collected and we observed the surrounding bone by an implant drawing test. We measured the BMD and the area of the newly formed bone surrounding the implant inserted part using image analysis software Image-Pro PLUS Ver. 4.0 ® which it developed newly in micro focus computed tomography (micro CT). The results showed the machine and the blast implant together, which the BMD and area around the Ti15Zr4Nb4Ta implants were comparable to or greater than those around the Ti6Al4V implants. These results suggested that the new alloy, Ti15Zr4Nb4Ta, might be useful for orthopedic or dental implants with the added advantage of superior biologic safety and mechanical properties than the current alloy, Ti6Al4V.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Bone Mineral Density and Area of Newly Formed Bone Around Ti-15%Zr-4%Nb-4%Ta Alloy and Ti-6%Al-4%V Alloy Implants

Numata

Tanaka

Okazaki

et al. 2008

J. Hard Tissue Biology.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The overall survival rate of the implants was 33.3% for irradiated bone and 37.5% for nonirradiated bone with a follow-up period of 7 years. 25 Similarly, in a study by Moran et al, 25 implants were placed in six patients with orbital defect. Of these patients, five had a history of postoperative radiation therapy (45-66 Gy).…”

Section: Placement Of Implants In Irradiated Bonementioning

confidence: 95%

“…In addition, blood vessels undergo progressive endarteritis, hyalinization, and fibrosis; thus, resulting in regional ischemia 24 and a diminished osseous remodeling capacity. 25 Hyperbaric oxygen (HBO) therapy is considered to counteract some of the negative effects of radiation therapy by improving angiogenesis and stimulating bone growth and turnover, 26 but the protocol regarding its use in the placement of implant in irradiated bone has not been fully established.…”

Section: Placement Of Implants In Irradiated Bonementioning

confidence: 99%

“…28 Overall, the success rates of implants in the orbital bone reported in the literature are between 33.3% and 96.4% in the irradiated bone and between 37.5% and 100% in the nonirradiated bone. 25,27,29 On the contrary, a steady loss of implants in the orbital region has also been noted over long follow-up periods as compared to the auricular and nasal regions. 25,30 Long-term studies are imperative to fully understand the effects of irradiation on craniofacial osseointegration.…”

Section: Placement Of Implants In Irradiated Bonementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Orbital prosthesis fabrication: current challenges and future aspects

Shrestha¹,

Thaworanunta²

2016

OAS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Orbital defect, arising from tumor-related resections, trauma, and congenital anomalies, can lead to negative functional and psychological effects in the patients. Rehabilitation with an orbital prosthesis can provide satisfactory aesthetic outlook and can be combined with surgical reconstruction to improve the retention. Despite less than ideal properties, silicone elastomer is the most commonly used material to fabricate orbital prosthesis. Several studies have been conducted on developing newer materials and improving the properties of silicone elastomer. Craniofacial implants offer greater retention compared to adhesives, but they have been observed to have a higher risk of implant failure and related side effects when placed in irradiated bone. This review gives a scope on understanding the current challenges faced during fabrication of orbital prosthesis and the future directions of this field.

show abstract

“…Placement of craniofacial implants for larger defects is generally located in the supraorbital rim or lateral rim of the residual orbit. Medial placement of the implant is discouraged due to diminished bone quantity and quality (Nishimura et al, 1998). It is always recommended for the patient to wear glasses to protect the natural eye and to camouflage the non-blinking prosthetic eye.…”

Section: Orbital/ocularmentioning

confidence: 99%