Another point that our learners discussed
was the sulcus around teeth and implants.
The attachment of the peri-implant tissues
and the height of the biological width
do not appear to be influenced
by the gingival biotype of the patient.
Also, as of today, no surgical technique, surface,
or device has been able to
predictably manipulate the soft tissue attachment around implants.
As you heard from Professor Ivanovski,
we have made tremendous progress in osseointegration,
by improving the implant surfaces.
But when it comes to the soft tissue attachment, guess what?
We are at the same point we were
with the first Brånemark implants.
So make a note there, those of you
who are after a cool research project,
an improvement in the soft tissue attachment
could be a significant breakthrough in implant dentistry.
Many people wondered if we could actually create
an equally shallow healthy sulcus around
implants as we have around teeth.
I think this is possible but it
greatly depends on the local anatomy.
So if we are dealing with an area of
the alveolar ridge that is relatively flat,
as it might be in the posterior maxilla or mandible,
the peri-implant sulcus can be relatively shallow,
especially around tissue level implants.
However, in the aesthetic zone,
this is where a deep sulcus is almost inevitable.
And in most cases, the better the aesthetics we achieve,
the deeper the sulcus that we will have to create.
Finally, some questions that caught our attention.
Can we create an implant coating that could
offer shock absorption like a periodontal ligament?
Or is the pattern of bone resorption
when we remove implants the same as when we remove teeth?
Excellent questions, for which
we have no answers at present.
So maybe this could be some exciting
research projects for some of you?
I’m looking forward to continue
our exciting interaction in Week 2
and thank you all for your enthusiasm and participation.