Abstract
Practitioners have used hydroxyapatite-coated (HA-coated) endosseous and subperiosteal implants in various forms for many years. These have included root forms in both screw and cylindrical shapes, blades, and subperiosteals. The clinical predictability remains controversial and subject to claims and counterclaims. The early days of dental implantology involving root-form implants recommended their placement in fully edentulous cases only, and anterior to the maxillary sinus and mental foramen. Today's philosophy and rationale of dental implantology include the placement of a single implant replacing a missing natural tooth (especially where the teeth adjacent to the edentulous site have no caries or restorative experience). Implants are used to replace the natural dentition in one quadrant/segment, often preceded or accompanied by ridge augmentation and/or sinus grafting if sufficient bone is not present. So we have to address the clinical predictability of survival in terms of indications, quantity, and quality of bone. Clinical data and experience suggest that hydroxyapatite-coated (HA) dental implants may (and possibly should) be used in (1) Type IV bone, (2) fresh extraction sites, (3) grafted maxillary and/or nasal sinuses, or (4) with short implants (≤ 10 mm in length).
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
