• Title/Summary/Keyword: 근단병소

Search Result 3, Processing Time 0.019 seconds

Treatment of retrograde peri-implantitis: seven-year follow-up study (역행성 임플란트 근단병소 주위염(Retrograde Peri-implantitis) 치료의 7년 관찰)

  • Lee, Ju-Youn
    • Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
    • /
    • v.30 no.3
    • /
    • pp.259-264
    • /
    • 2014
  • Retrograde peri-implantitis (RPI) is defined as a clinically symptomatic periapical lesion. RPI is generally accompanied by symptoms of pain, tenderness, swelling and fistula. Several etiologic factors of RPI were possible, residual bacteria would be the main cause of RPI. Various treatment modalities have been introduced: debridement only or a combination of debridement with the grafting material accompanied by a detoxification of the infected implant surfaces, apicoectomy and so on. Although the definitive management methods remain undefined, many favorable clinical results of a treatment of RPI have been published. This case report introduces the 7-year long-term clinical result of the application the principle: implant surface detoxification using saline and chlorhexidine and guided bone regeneration with bone graft material and barrier membrane. If the implant was not mobile, it would be possible to treat RPI according to surgical approach and good results will be maintained over long term.

Clinical managements of implant periapical lesions: a report of three cases with five to twelve years of follow-up (임플란트 근단 병소의 임상적 접근 방법: 5 - 12년간의 증례 보고)

  • Kim, Hyun Ju;Park, Se Hwan;Chang, Beom-Seok;Um, Heung-Sik;Lee, Jae-Kwan
    • Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
    • /
    • v.31 no.2
    • /
    • pp.150-157
    • /
    • 2015
  • The purpose of this report is to suggest clinical managements of implant periapical lesions by presenting three clinical cases managed by either the infected form or the inactive form with the follow-up period of five to twelve years. One patient with no clinical symptom was regarded as inactive form. Two patients having pain were regarded as infected form and have been under the systemic antibiotic therapy. In one patient, the symptom subsided and the size of radiolucent lesion decreased. However, the other patient showed increased size of lesion causing the implant unstable, which leaded to remove the implant and to replace it. There was neither additional increase of the lesion nor functional problem for all three. It is important to detect implant periapical lesion in early stage before jeopardizing the stable implant and manage properly using systemic antibiotic therapy and surgical approach if needed, depending on infected form and inactive form.