Quad case with 2 long implants in the zygomatic bone and 2 long implants in the pterygoid bone
Dr Luc Vrielinck MD DDS Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Comments at Luc@Vrielinck.be Genk, Belgium
Starting point • Patient desires: fixed prosthesis in the upper jaw • Status: Division D atrophy in upper jaw • Treatment plan: – Quad long implant placement, delayed loading – Overdenture on a bar
Chronology • • • •
24/04/2008: Placement QZ 21/10/2008: Second stage QZ 19/01/2009: final work Complication: persistent paresthesia of the left maxillary nerve (see the matching of preoperative and postoperative images) • 23/08/2010: 22 months follow-up
13/11/2007: Intake
13/11/2007: Intake
13/11/2007: Intake
Bone table: analysis of thickness and height (in mm) on following tooth positions
16
15
14
13
12
11
21
22
23
24
25
26
H
-
-
-
2.9
6.5
3.4
3.9
3.9
4.6
-
-
-
T
-
-
-
2.0
4.2
3.5
2.5
3.6
3.3
-
-
-
H= height of the bone, T=thickness
Based on the data of the bonetable the treatment plan was decided on 2 long implants with zygomatic anchorage and 2 long implants with pterygoid bone anchorage
Treatment plan
01/02/2008: Planning of the implants using Procera™ Software
01/02/2008: Planning of the implants using Procera™ Software
01/02/2008: Planning of the implants using Procera™ Software
01/02/2008: Planning of the implants using Procera™ Software
01/02/2008: Planning of the implants using Procera™ Software
01/02/2008: Planning of the implants using Procera™ Software
01/02/2008: Planning of the implants using Procera™ Software
01/02/2008: Planning of the implants using Procera™ Software
01/02/2008: Planning of the implants using Procera™ Software
01/02/2008: Planning of the implants using Procera™ Software
01/02/2008: Planning of the implants using Procera™ Software
01/02/2008: Planning of the implants using Procera™ Software
• Problem: the drilling directions of both zygoma implants cross each other • In the Surgical Template; the extension sleeves collide with each other and by consequence the Surgical Template cannot be fabricated • Solution: the implant treatment is splitted over two Surgical Templates, using the same position of the anchor pins
Drillguide 1: including left zygoma implants and both posterior implants
01/02/2008: Planning of the implants using Procera™ Software
Drillguide 2: including right zygoma implant using same anchor pin anchorage as the first dill guide
01/02/2008: Planning of the implants using Procera™ Software
Surgical technique used in this case • The Surgical Template N°1 was fixed using a surgical index (under local anaesthesia, with patient sitting • Patient was then brought under general anesthesia • The drilling of 3 implants was done using Surgical Template No 1 • Surgical Template n°1 was removed and replaced by Template N°2 using the same anchor pins • Right zygoma implant was drilled • Surgical Template was removed • Implants were placed freehand
Apparent correct position of both implants
Here we have an obvious problem !
24/04/2008: Postoperative imaging
Here we have a problem !
24/04/2008: Postoperative imaging
Orange= planned position; Yellow = placed position Frontal view
Occlusal view
Distal displacement of the tip of the right Zygomatic implant 29/10/2008: Pre post matching
Orange= planned position; Yellow = placed position
Top view
Left lateral view
Cranial displacement of the tip of the left implant with pterygoid anchorage
Discussion of the Surgical Outcome • 2 out of 4 implants demonstrate a deviation of the tip of the implant of > 1cm resulting in: – for the right zygoma implant: an emergence of the implant posterior of the zygomatic bone – For the left pterygoid: cranial tilting of the implant; the tip of the implant entering the pterygopalatine fossa, causing laesion of maxillary nerve (V2)
21/10/2008: second stage surgery
23/08/2010: Follow-up 22 months
23/08/2010: Follow-up 22 months
23/08/2010: Follow-up 22 months
23/08/2010: Follow-up 22 months
23/08/2010: Follow-up 22 months
23/08/2010: Follow-up 22 months
23/08/2010: Follow-up 22 months
23/08/2010: Follow-up 22 months
23/08/2010: Follow-up 22 months
Very good occlusal distribution of forces
23/08/2010: Follow-up 22 months
Very good occlusal distribution of forces
23/08/2010: Follow-up 22 months
Very good occlusal distribution of forces
23/08/2010: Follow-up 22 months