This document outlines the history and evolution of dental implants, emphasizing the contributions of Per-Ingar Brånemark to modern concepts and treatment protocols. It describes the various types of endosseous implants, including blade and root form implants, their design features, and materials used to enhance stability. Additionally, it compares one-piece and two-piece implants and discusses the implications of different connection types for aesthetics and performance.

1. History of Dental Implants

5. Osseointegration
• Although dental implants in varying forms have been used in the replacement of
missing teeth for many years, current scientifically based concepts and treatment
protocols owe their origins to the pioneering work of Per-Ingvar Br‫ه‬nemark, who
was a Swedish physician and researcher

9. subperiosteal implant

14. Transmandibular Implants

15. Pin implant

16. Endosseous Implants
• An endosteal or endosseous dental implant is designed for placement
into the alveolar or basal bone of the mandible or maxilla while
maintaining the body of the implant within the bone. There are two
basic types of endosseous implants, blade and root form.

17. Blade Implants
• Blade implants are endosseous implants with a flat shape and are available in
one-piece and two-piece designs.
• With the widespread utilization and high success rates of root form implants,
overall usage of blade implants has decreased, but they remain available from
several manufacturers and find usage in the narrow bony ridge as an option for
horizontal bone grafting.

18. Root form implants

19. Cylinder Implants
• A cylinder or press-fit implant is an endosseous design consisting of a
straight cylinder that is pushed or tapped into the surgical osteotomy

20. • The primary stability of these designs relies on a highly roughened
surface texture to increase frictional resistance to dislodgement from
the bone.
• Surfaces used for these implants included hydroxyapatite (HA),
titanium plasma spray (TPS), and small metal balls sintered to the
surface of the implant.

21. Screw-Shaped Implants
•The original Branemark implant was a parallel-walled design, featuring an implant
body that maintained the same diameter throughout its length. Current designs
feature a tapered screw design, in which the diameter of the implant body
decreases toward the apex

22. One-Piece versus Two-Piece

23. Bone-Level versus Tissue-Level Implants
• Implants that are designed for placement with the collar at or near
the soft tissue margin are referred to as tissue-level implants

24. • Tissue-level implants were developed to increase the distance of the
implant–abutment interface from the bone surface to provide the
required biologic width.
• Bone level designs were later developed with conical connections and
platform shifts, which serve similar goals.

25. Connection Type

26. Screw loosening is a risk for external hex connections because
greater lateral forces are transferred to the connection screw and
because preload of the screw is the only force that resists occlusal
forces.
Less esthetic results
 Inadequate microbial seal

27. Internal connection
Less screw loosening
 Better esthetics
Improved microbial seal
 Better joint strength