Dental osseointegrated implants have now been in clinical use for over half a century (first clinical use by Swedish physician and researcher Professor Per-Ingvar Brånemark in 1965). Although their production, surface treatment, standardization and control methods have evolved over the years, their basic design, which resembles the root of a single-rooted tooth, remains the same.

Implants are therefore nothing more than artificial tooth roots made of titanium alloy (in recent years, implants have also been made from ceramics, but also from synthetic materials), which are placed with a suitable surgical procedure inside the jaw bone in place of a missing tooth. After osseointegration time has elapsed, the artificial titanium root is then used as a substitute for the missing tooth, after a fully customized prosthetic tooth molar has been fabricated over it.

Implants can be used in most patients [1] either singly to replace individual teeth or in groups of two or more to replace numerically more missing teeth with the help of bridges resting on them. They can also be used in combination with artificial dentures in order to increase their retention, when this is insufficient.

And while the higher cost, fear of the surgical placement process, and the length of time required for the final recovery may deter some patients, it is worth considering that:

• in the long run, implants are cheaper than any other classic prosthetic solution due to their longevity
• the scientific expertise of the doctor is a guarantee for the smooth conduct of the surgical placement and the elimination of difficulties
• the recovery period is 4-6 months, but recovery is guaranteed.

In addition, the use of implants to replace teeth that are lost in relation to classic prosthetic solutions (bridges, dentures) shows the most important advantages such as:

• keeping the bone in place,
• the absence of grinding on adjacent healthy teeth,
• the absence of loading adjacent teeth with greater masticatory forces than are normally proportional to them consistently
• the preservation of sensation and chewing ability at the absolute.
• Finally, the restoration with implants is considered lifelong, provided, of course, that good oral hygiene is followed and regular rechecks are done by the surgeon.

All these advantages make implants the most ideal and most biological and modern answer to the restoration of missing teeth. Their success in morphologically and functionally replacing the missing teeth and preserving the supporting tissues at the same time is not comparable to any other classic prosthetic solution.

[1]Limitations that make placement impossible in specific patients are practically minimal.

Absolute contraindications to placing implants in a patient are only complete atrophy of the jaw bone to the extent that it is not amenable to regenerative techniques and immunodeficiency (acquired or idiopathic) for at least as long as it exists.

The relative contraindications for the placement of implants, on the other hand, are many, of varying severity and all have to do with the defense and nutrition of the implantation area. Their seriousness should be evaluated in the context of honest cooperation between the patient and the doctor, so that the solution that suits each patient individually can be chosen. However, such contraindications are the presence of persistent periodontitis, the existence of diabetes mellitus, smoking, the use of drugs or psychotropic substances (even for medical reasons), the existence of severe osteoporosis, but also the use of drugs that affect bone metabolism ( γ-globulins, steroids, bisphosphonates, etc.).