An Evaluation of the Efficacy and Acceptability of Basal Implants in Traumatically Deficient Ridges of the Maxilla and the Mandible

Geeti Vajdi Mitra; Nikit Agrawal; Nupur Shukla; K Aishwarya; Ponnamma C C; Amal Raj

doi:10.7759/cureus.43443

An Evaluation of the Efficacy and Acceptability of Basal Implants in Traumatically Deficient Ridges of the Maxilla and the Mandible

Cureus. 2023 Aug 13;15(8):e43443. doi: 10.7759/cureus.43443. eCollection 2023 Aug.

Authors

Geeti Vajdi Mitra¹, Nikit Agrawal¹, Nupur Shukla², K Aishwarya³, Ponnamma C C⁴, Amal Raj⁵

Affiliations

¹ Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Sri Aurobindo College of Dentistry, Indore, IND.
² Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Sri Aurobindo Institute of Dental Science, Indore, IND.
³ Dentistry, Government Dental College and Hospital, Vijayawada, IND.
⁴ Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, ESIC Dental College, Kalaburagi, IND.
⁵ Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Malabar Dental College and Research Centre, Manoor, IND.

Abstract

Background and objective Rehabilitation of edentulous jaw areas is a complex procedure that has witnessed numerous advancements in technique and materials for better functional and aesthetic outcomes over the years. Dental implants have emerged as a cutting-edge, cost-effective, and non-invasive alternative to traditional removable partial dentures (RPDs), fixed partial dentures (FPDs), and full dentures. In this study, the basal implant was tested in traumatically deficient ridges on the mandible and the maxilla to determine its effectiveness and acceptability. Materials and methods The purpose of this research was to determine whether basal implants might be successfully used to restore traumatized ridges in the maxilla and mandible. Eleven individuals aged 20-55 years participated in the trial, and a total of 30 implants were used. All patients were evaluated for pain, soft tissue health around the basal implant, and patient satisfaction, with follow-ups on the third day and at three and six months postoperatively. Results The mean pain score measured using the visual analog scale (VAS) of patients during follow-ups was 2.00 ±1.15 on the third day, 0.40 ±0.84 at three months, and 0.00 ±0.00 at six months postoperatively. The mean gingival index score of patients was 1.30 ±0.48 on the third day, 0.10 ±0.31 at three months, and 0.00 ±0.00 at six months postoperatively. The mean patient satisfaction score was 34.77±5.54 on the third day, 41.11 ±6.27 at three months, and 40.7 7±10.91 at six months postoperatively. The mean immediate postoperative marginal bone level was 12.33 ±2.26 mm, and it was 10.85 ±2.29 mm after six months postoperatively. The mean preoperative crestal bone level was 10.76 ±1.77 mm and it was 9.70 ±1.79 mm after six months postoperatively. Conclusion Due to the fact that basal implantology does not involve extensive augmentation procedures necessary for the placement of conventional implants, it plays an important role in the rehabilitation of edentulous maxillary and mandibular arches, especially in traumatic, moderate to severely atrophic maxillary and mandibular arches.

Keywords: atrophic ridges; basal implants; edentulous maxillary and mandibular arches; implant dentistry; implants.