2. To preserve what is normal
To prevent the undesired movement
To get the desired movement
To keep it as intra oral as possible
THE BIGGEST CHALLENGE
www.indiandentalacademy.com
3. Innumerable attempts and
innovations
Success very subjective
Dogmatic following
The latest in the inventory
www.indiandentalacademy.com
5. Versatility in providing anchorage
Helping in bringing about tooth movements
which have been of a great challenge to the
orthodontist like intrusion of upper and
lower molars
www.indiandentalacademy.com
6. Being as intraoral as possible
Less invasive though it is a surgical
procedure
www.indiandentalacademy.com
10. Pre-Christian era - Artificial materials
~1945, Vitallium screws
~1970, Linkow-Endosseous blade implants
Carbon implants (Osseointegration ?)
~1975, Kawahara et al Bioglass coated ceramic
implants
~1977, Branemark et al-Osseointegration
Hydroxy apatite
crystalswww.indiandentalacademy.com
11. ~1983, Creekmore possibility of skeletal
anchorage
~1989, Roberts – titanium implants
~1991, Higuchi & James – Titanium fixtures
~1998, Costa et al – Miniscrews
~1999, Umemori et al – SAS for open bite
~2003, Giuliano Maino
www.indiandentalacademy.com
16. SPECIFICITY
~Maximum load >< quantity of
Osseointegration dependent on surface area
& tissue contact
TIME OF LOADING
~4-6 months after fixation
www.indiandentalacademy.com
17. THE DIMENSIONS OF THE IMPLANT SHOULD
BE CONGRUENT WITH THE AMOUNT OF
BONE AVAILABLE AT THE POINT OF
INSERTION
~3-4mm in diameter
~6-10mm in length
~Length >< 1/ Diameter
www.indiandentalacademy.com
