Received 27/02/2024

DOI: 10.35556/idr-2024-3(108)46-51
Modern aspects and clinical perspectives of changing the biotype of the mucous membrane in the projection of the dental implant
Chekanova A.A.1, Selsky N.E.2, Kovtun O.P.1, Shimova M.E.1
1Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education “Urals State Medical University” of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation
620028, Russia, Yekaterinburg, Repina St., 3
2Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education “Bashkir State Medical University”
450008, Russia, Republic of Bashkortostan, Ufa, Lenin St., 3

E-mail address: oborotistov@mail.ru

Summary
Today, there is a growing scientific interest in the condition of the soft tissues surrounding dental implants and their impact on the long-term prognosis of implant treatment. It is known that risk factors for the development of peri-implantitis include deficiency or complete absence of attached keratinized gum in the implant area. The paper provides a comparative literature analysis of various methods of mucogingival surgery in the field of dental implants.
The paper presents a comparative literature analysis of various methods of mucogingival surgery in the field of dental implants.
It is shown that information on the terms of use of dental implants and the conditions of their functioning is quite contradictory. Loss of implants occurs for a number of reasons, among which an important place is occupied by periimplantitis, progressive loss of bone tissue and attached gum in the periimplant zone. The risk of remote postoperative complications remains very high. Complications may be associated with the fact that in clinical practice the features of the histostructure of the gum in the adentia zone are not taken into account.
It is concluded that soft tissue plastic surgery as one of the stages of surgical preparation after reconstructive interventions on the jaws is justified according to the literature. At the same time, the problem of creating a peri-implant “buffer” zone, despite significant advances in the development of new technologies for its formation, has not been finally resolved. Discussions continue about the role of attached keratinized gum around implants.

Keywords: mucosal biotype, implant, attached gum.

For citation: Chekanova A.A., Selsky N.E., Kovtun O.P., Shimova M.E. Modern aspects and clinical perspectives of changing the biotype of the mucous membrane in the projection of the dental implant (based on a literature review). Stomatology for All / Int. Dental Review. 2024; no.3(108): 46-51 (in Russian). doi: 10.35556/idr-2024-3(108)46-51

References

1. Amkhadova M.A., Mokhov A.V., Muzaeva Z.R. et al. Method for increasing keratinized gingiva in the area of implants using a palatal connective tissue graft. Med. alphabet. 2015; no. 13: 28–30.
2. Ashurko I.P. Comparative analysis of various methods for increasing the width of keratinized attached gingiva in patients undergoing dental implantation: author’s abstract. diss. candidate of medical sciences. Moscow, 2016; 24 p.
3. Gankovskaya L.V., Khelminskaya N.M., Molchanova E.A. et al. The role of innate immunity factors in periodontal pathogenesis. 2016; no. 2: 100–107.
4. Deniev A.M. Dental implantation after reconstructive surgeries using revascularized autografts: author’s abstract. diss. … candidate of medical sciences. Moscow, 2019; 26 p.
5. Deniev AM, Gurin AN, Dzikovitskaya LS et al. Achieving the predicted positive result of dental rehabilitation in the zone of aesthetic significance. Kremlin Medicine. Clinical Bulletin. 2018; 2: 50–54.
6. Eroshin VA, Dzhalalova MV, Arutyunov SD et al. Mobility and load-bearing capacity of dental implants. Moscow: Practical Medicine; 2017; 128 p.
7. Kuri F. Regenerative methods in implantology. Moscow: ABC of Dentists; 2013; 678 p.
8. Popov N.V. Comparative assessment of the degree of stability of dental implants after reconstructive surgeries on the jaws. Institute of Dentistry. 2018; no. 2 (79): 86–87.
9. Reshetnikov A.P., Nikityuk D.B., Urakov A.L. Method for eliminating soft tissue insufficiency around an installed implant. Invention application RUS No. 201423087 dated 18.06.2014.
10. Marx R. Pathology of the oral cavity and maxillofacial region in the practice of a dentist (translated by K. Gusakov, A. Ostrovsky). 2019; 376 p.
11. Abdallah M.N., Badran Z., Ciobanu O., Hamdan N., Tamimi F. Strategies for optimizing the soft tissue seal around osseointegrated implants. Adv Health Mater. 2017; 6. doi: 10.1002/adhm,201700549
12. Gineviciute E., Alkimavicius J., Andrijauskas R., Sakalauskas D., Linkevicius T. Comparison of different cleaning procedures of zirconium oxide surface. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018; 29(S17): 45. doi: 10.1111/clr.2_13356
13. Linkevicius T. Zero Bone Loss Concept. Quintessence Publishing, 2019; 287 р.
14. Newman M.G., Takei H.H., Klokkevold P.R., Carranza F.A. Newman and Carranza’s Clinical Periodontology; 2018; 5032 p.
15. Sailer I., Strasding M., Valente N.A., Zwahlen M., Liu S., Pjetursson B.E. A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of zirconia-ceramic and metal-ceramic multiple-unit fixed dental prostheses. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018; 29(suppl 16): 184–198.