It is appropriate to establish a balance between prosthetic and anatomical concerns when inserting an implant. If a clinician focuses on anatomical concerns, he or she may place the implant at an angle to avoid adjacent teeth or fenestrating the buccal or lingual bone plates. Then, to achieve prosthetically desired parallelism between implants or teeth, the clinician can place an angled abutment. Based on the limited clinical trials reported in the literature, angled abutments result in increased stress on the implants and adjacent bone, but within the physiological limit. Numerous types of prefabricated abutments are available at specific angles. Preangled abutments with angulations varying from 15 to 35° often are commercially available. Furthermore, laboratory technicians can fabricate custom abutments to contours needed for a satisfactory prosthetic reconstruction wherein we have to select proper angulations.

Aims: Crestal and basal implants are endosseous aids to create osseointegrated points of retention. These two types of implants are not only differentiated by the way they are inserted, but also by the way the forces are transmitted. The purpose of this study is to compare the micromotion between two crestal and one basal implant-supported crown, when the mesiodistal space is 14 mm in mandibular first molar region. Materials and methods: A three-dimensional finite element method was used to evaluate the micromotion in two osseointegrated crestal implants and one basally osseointegrated implant when the mesiodistal space is 14 mm in mandibular first molar region. The loads were applied according to cusp—marginal ridge relation. A total of 333 N and 645 N of load was applied to premolar and each molar respectively. The results were analyzed using von Mises criteria. Results: The results of the comparison of crestal and basal implants to replace mandibular first molar demonstrated that micromotion in crestal implant (14.545) was less than in basal implant (36.031). Conclusion: Thus, within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that the use of two crestal implants to replace a missing mandibular first molar with mesiodistal edentulous space of 14 mm is a preferable option as compared with basal implant to replace a missing mandibular molar.

Implant design refers to the three-dimensional structure of the implant, with all the elements and characteristics that compose it. Dental implants are subjected to various force magnitudes and directions during function. Because implants function to transfer occlusal loads to the surrounding biologic tissues, functional design objectives should aim to manage biomechanical loads to optimize the implant-supported prosthesis function. Thus, the primary functional design objective is to manage biomechanical loads to optimize the implant-supported prosthesis function. An implant has a macroscopic body design and a microscopic component of implant design. The microscopic features are most important during initial implant healing and the initial loading period. The macroscopic implant body design is most important during early loading and mature loading periods. The product used by the implant team may increase or decrease the risk of screw loosening, crestal bone loss, implant body bone loss, peri-implantitis, esthetics of soft tissue drape, implant failure, and implant body fracture. This article shall help the learner in making a judicious informed decision regarding the different factors governing the reduction of overall stress in implant fixtures and, thus, providing a better treatment to their patients. Search strategy: A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE from 1975 to 2014 to identify studies, from simulated laboratory models, animal, to human, related to this topic using the keywords of implant biomechanics, implant macrodesign, thread pitch, thread geometry, thread depth, thread width, and implant crestal module.

Intolerance to dentures as a result of allergy is very rare. In such cases, the allergy is triggered not by the acrylic but mostly due to the unpolymerized precursors. Epicutaneous test reveals the allergy is due to the presence of benzoyl peroxide initiator and hydroquinone inhibitor. In contrast, the monomers methyl methacrylate (MMA) and triethylene glycol dimethacrylate are allergens that are primarily responsible and relevant for dental clinicians and technicians in their jobs. Latex and vinyl gloves are not adequate barriers for monomer and are generally unknown as clinicians still work with doughy acrylic mixtures without adequate precautions. Research papers were reviewed—many papers were studies for their cytotoxicity effects of Methyl Methacrylate. Various reports mentioned in the literature make the monomer as the main felon. Allergen-free dentures as an alternative to denture base resins and precautionary measures for dental professionals and technicians have also been mentioned.

A patient with failed implant in relation to 44 was being referred to the dental office. Site 44 was reimplanted with AB Dent dental implants, and guided bone regeneration was done with Smartbone^® bone graft and resorbable collagen membrane. Root submerged technique was followed in relation to 45. One year postoperative follow-up shows stable bone levels in relation to 44, 45, and 46.