Implant Gigi One-Piece vs Two-Pieces dalam Praktek Sehari-Hari

Saat ini, implant merupakan pilihan terbaik untuk menggantikan gigi yang tanggal, akan tetapi prosedur pemasangannya terbilang rumit dan memerlukan prosedur bedah kedua untuk pemasangan prostetik. Beberapa komplikasi seperti screw patah atau longgar dan adanya celah mikro pada batas pertemuan implant dan abutment dapat menyebabkan kegagalan implant. Studi kasus ini bertujuan untuk membahas mengenai keuntungan dan kerugian desain implant gigi one-piece dan two-pieces. Kasus pertama, seorang wanita berusia 43 tahun datang untuk mendapatkan perawatan implant pada region 16. Ketinggian tulang alveolar yang tersedia adalah 5 mm. Prosedur pengangkatan dasar sinus transalveolar dilakukan dengan pemberian allograft sebanyak 0,5 cc dilanjutkan dengan pemasangan implant gigi one-piece sepanjang 12 mm. Kasus kedua, seorang wanita 24 tahun datang untuk mendapatkan perawatan implant pada regio 46. Ketinggian tulang alveolar yang tersedia adalah 12 mm, kemudian dilakukan pemasangan implant gigi two-pieces sepanjang 10 mm. Implant gigi one-piece menawarkan berbagai keunggulan yaitu: hanya diperlukan sekali prosedur bedah dan prosedur prostetik lebih sederhana. Desain ini juga meniadakan celah mikro pada perbatasan implant dan abutment. Desain implant gigi one-piece memiliki keterbatasan pada pilihan prosedur prostetik apabila dibandingkan dengan desain implant gigi two-pieces. One-Piece Versus Two-pieces Tooth Implant In Daily Practice. Implant had been a gold standard to replace missing tooth. However, implant marketed today was considered complex, and needs a second surgery. Complications may occur such as screw loosening or fracture and the presence of micro gap at implant-abutment-junction that is found causing fixture failure. The one-piece-implant design may offer some advantages. Purpose: this paper was aimed to discuss the pros and cons of one-piece-implants and two-piece-implants. Case 1 A 43-year-old woman came to place an implant on #16. The available bone height was 5 mm. A trans alveolar sinus lift procedure was performed with 0,5 cc allograft. A 12 mm one-piece-implant was inserted. Case 2 A 24-year-old woman came to place an implant on #46. The available bone height was 12 mm and a 10 mm two-piece-implant was inserted. Discussion: One-piece-implant offers some advantage. It needs no second surgery, easier placement protocol, and more natural prosthetic procedures. The design is preventing the failure in implant-abutment-junction failure. The absence of micro gap in one-piece-implant seems superior in preventing crestal bone resorption. However, the prosthetic option was limited in one-piece-implant. Two-piece-implant offers more choices in prosthetic abutment. Conclusion: One-piece-implant was easier and provide simple protocol with limited choice on prosthetic.