3D-TEXNOLOGIYALAR ASOSIDA ISHLAB CHIQARILGAN INDIVIDUAL SUBPERIOSTAL IMPLANTATLARNING ALVEOLYAR O‘SIQ KONTURINI TIKLASHDAGI AFZALLIKLARI
##semicolon##
Atrofik alveolyar o‘siq##common.commaListSeparator## subperiostal implantat##common.commaListSeparator## individual implantat##common.commaListSeparator## CAD/CAM##common.commaListSeparator## 3D-printingAbstrak
Ushbu maqolada atrofiyaga uchragan alveolyar o‘siqqa ega bo‘lgan bemorlarda individual subperiostal implantatlarni qo‘llashning klinik-biomexanik asoslari va qisqa muddatli jarrohlik natijalari tahlil qilingan. Zamonaviy CAD/CAM modellashtirish va 3D-printing texnologiyalari yordamida tayyorlangan anatomik mos implantatlar suyak rezorbsiyasi yuqori bo‘lgan Cawood–Howell V–VI toifa bemorlarda klassik endoossal implantatsiyaning cheklovlarini bartaraf etishi qayd etilgan. Tadqiqotda 18 nafar bemor ishtirok etib, implantatlar 95–98% anatomik moslikka ega bo‘lgani, jarrohlik asoratlar darajasi 5,5–11% oralig‘ida bo‘lgani, ortopedik yuklama uchun 4–6 hafta kifoya qilishi aniqlangan. Individual subperiostal implantatlarning biomexanik afzalliklari – yuklamaning kortikal zonalarga optimal taqsimlanishi, mikrostess kuzatilmasligi va protez barqarorligining yuqoriligi bilan izohlandi. Olingan natijalar ushbu texnologiya atrofik jag‘larda invazivligi past, prognozi yuqori bo‘lgan samarali usul ekanini ko‘rsatadi.
##submission.citations##
1. Tojiyev F. I., Azimov A. M. Effective Restoration Of Mandibular Defects With Custom-Made Titanium Implants //planning. – 2021. – Т. 7. – №. 11. – С. 14.
2. Ризаев Д. и др. Ultrasound Osteometry in the Diagnosis of Inflammatory Processes of Periapical Tissues //in Library. – 2021. – Т. 21. – №. 3. – С. 36-39.
3. Cawood J. I., Howell R. A. A classification of the edentulous jaws //International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery. – 1988. – Т. 17. – №. 4. – С. 232-236.
4. Vatteroni E., Covani U., Fabris G. B. M. The New Generation of Subperiosteal Implants for Patient-Specific Treatment of Atrophic Dental Arches: A Literature Review and Two Case Reports //International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry. – 2023. – Т. 43. – №. 6.
5. Barone A., Covani U. Maxillary alveolar ridge reconstruction with nonvascularized autogenous block bone: clinical results //Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. – 2007. – Т. 65. – №. 10. – С. 2039-2046.
6. Nassar H. I., Fateen A. Accuracy of fit for cobaltchromium bar over two implants fabricated with different manufacturing techniques: an in-vitro study //BMC Oral Health. – 2023. – Т. 23. – №. 1. – С. 946.
7. Bokavšek L. Implant prosthetic possibilities for rehabilitation of atrophic jaws : дис. – University of Zagreb. School of Dental Medicine, 2024.
8. Mangano C., Mangano F., Shibli J. A., Ricci M. Custom-made subperiosteal implants: A systematic review of modern CAD/CAM implant frameworks for severely atrophic jaws // International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. – 2022. – Т. 51. – №. 8. – Б. 1032–1042.
9. Cassetta M., Stefanelli L. V., Di Carlo S., Pompa G. Custom-made titanium subperiosteal implants with digital workflow: clinical outcomes in severe maxillary atrophy // Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery. – 2021. – Т. 49. – №. 11. – Б. 1005–1012.
10. Ciocca L., Fantini M., De Crescenzio F., Persiani F. Direct metal laser sintering (DMLS) of titanium subperiosteal implants: biomechanical and clinical considerations // Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing. – 2019. – Т. 57. – №. 6. – Б. 1283–1295.
11. Mommaerts M. Y. Evolution of patient-specific subperiosteal implants using additive manufacturing: indications, design, and clinical perspectives // Annals of Maxillofacial Surgery. – 2020. – Т. 10. – №. 1. – Б. 18–25.
