Home Print this page Email this page Small font size Default font size Increase font size
Users Online: 2400
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 9  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 2067-2070

Assessment of basal implants in compromised ridges

1 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Dental Sciences, Davangere, Karnataka, India
2 Department of Conservative Dentistry, Endodontics, College of Dental Sciences, Davangere, Karnataka, India
3 Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, College of Dental Sciences, Davangere, Karnataka, India
4 Department of Prosthodontics, RIMS Dental College, Imphal, Manipur, India
5 Department of Periodontology, RIMS Dental College, Imphal, Manipur, India
6 Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Sri Sai Hospital, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Sankalp Verma
Consultant Dental Surgeon, Sri Sai Hospital, Delhi Road, Moradabad - 244 001, Uttar Pradesh
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_1149_19

Rights and Permissions

Aim: The aim of the present study was to evaluate clinically, radiographically, and functionally the outcomes of immediately loaded basal implants when placed in patients with compromised bone/alveolar ridges. Materials and Methods: A total of 18 systemically healthy (9 male and 9 female) subjects with compromised bone with poor quantity or quality were included in the study. A total number of 57 implants was placed, out of which 26 implants were placed in maxilla and 31 implants in mandible. There were 6 patients in which single implants were placed and in rest of the 12 patients, multiple implants were placed, out of which full mouth rehabilitation was done in one patient. In 10 patients, implants were placed immediately in fresh extraction socket and in 7 patients, implants were placed in healed edentulous site. In all the patients, loading was done immediately within 72 h of implant placement. All patients were evaluated for primary and secondary stability, pain, periimplant bone levels using IOPA with grid and CBCT, bleeding, suppuration, sulcular bleeding index, prosthetic complications, and patient satisfaction at specified time intervals. Result: All the values obtained during the study were expressed in the form of mean, standard deviation, and standard error of the mean. The parameters were compared between groups using Paired t-test for intragroup comparison at a similar time, i.e., baseline, 1 month, and 3 months. The data collected was comprehensively analyzed using SPSS software. All implants were successful, with no incidence of infection, nil mobility at the end of the study period of 6 months. Conclusion: Thus, it can be concluded from the present study, that Basal implants can play a vital role in the rehabilitation of patients, where compromised quality and/or quantity of bone is present and additional augmentation procedures would be required for the placement of conventional root form implants.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded165    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal