case_images: PMC4700069_01
case_images: 3D digital volumetric reconstruction of the mandibular defect
case_images: 40902_2015_48_Fig5_HTML.jpg
case_images: PMC4700069_01_40902_2015_48_Fig5_HTML.jpg
case_images: Fig5
case_images: Preoperative clinical and radiographical examinations were used to assess the morphology of the alveolar ridge (Figs. 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9).
case_images: 3D digital volumetric reconstruction of HA scaffold placed in the defect
case_images: 40902_2015_48_Fig6_HTML.jpg
case_images: PMC4700069_01_40902_2015_48_Fig6_HTML.jpg
case_images: Fig6
case_images: Preoperative clinical and radiographical examinations were used to assess the morphology of the alveolar ridge (Figs. 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9).
case_images: 3D digital volumetric reconstruction of HA scaffold placed in the defect
case_images: 40902_2015_48_Fig7_HTML.jpg
case_images: PMC4700069_01_40902_2015_48_Fig7_HTML.jpg
case_images: Fig7
case_images: Preoperative clinical and radiographical examinations were used to assess the morphology of the alveolar ridge (Figs. 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9).
case_images: 3D digital volumetric reconstruction of implant placement in regenerated bone
case_images: 40902_2015_48_Fig8_HTML.jpg
case_images: PMC4700069_01_40902_2015_48_Fig8_HTML.jpg
case_images: Fig8
case_images: Preoperative clinical and radiographical examinations were used to assess the morphology of the alveolar ridge (Figs. 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9).
case_images: 3D digital volumetric reconstruction of implant placement in regenerated bone
case_images: 40902_2015_48_Fig9_HTML.jpg
case_images: PMC4700069_01_40902_2015_48_Fig9_HTML.jpg
case_images: Fig9
case_images: Preoperative clinical and radiographical examinations were used to assess the morphology of the alveolar ridge (Figs. 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9).
case_images: Intraoral radiography: the peri-implant defect
case_images: 40902_2015_48_Fig10_HTML.jpg
case_images: PMC4700069_01_40902_2015_48_Fig10_HTML.jpg
case_images: Fig10
case_images: At 2 months, after the implant was removed (Figs. 10 and 11), a full thickness midcrestal incision was made and a mucoperiosteal flap was raised.
case_images: Intraoral radiography: defect after implant removal
case_images: 40902_2015_48_Fig11_HTML.jpg
case_images: PMC4700069_01_40902_2015_48_Fig11_HTML.jpg
case_images: Fig11
case_images: At 2 months, after the implant was removed (Figs. 10 and 11), a full thickness midcrestal incision was made and a mucoperiosteal flap was raised.
case_images: Intraoral radiography: HA scaffold placement
case_images: 40902_2015_48_Fig12_HTML.jpg
case_images: PMC4700069_01_40902_2015_48_Fig12_HTML.jpg
case_images: Fig12
case_images: The bone volume following regeneration was satisfactory, and one short osseointegrated implant (4.75 x 7 mm) was placed in position 45 (Figs. 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17).
case_images: Intraoral radiography: regenerated bone after 5 months
case_images: 40902_2015_48_Fig13_HTML.jpg
case_images: PMC4700069_01_40902_2015_48_Fig13_HTML.jpg
case_images: Fig13
case_images: The bone volume following regeneration was satisfactory, and one short osseointegrated implant (4.75 x 7 mm) was placed in position 45 (Figs. 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17).
case_images: Intraoral radiography: implant placement
case_images: 40902_2015_48_Fig14_HTML.jpg
case_images: PMC4700069_01_40902_2015_48_Fig14_HTML.jpg
case_images: Fig14
case_images: The bone volume following regeneration was satisfactory, and one short osseointegrated implant (4.75 x 7 mm) was placed in position 45 (Figs. 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17).
case_images: Clinical view: HA scaffold placement
case_images: 40902_2015_48_Fig15_HTML.jpg
case_images: PMC4700069_01_40902_2015_48_Fig15_HTML.jpg
case_images: Fig15
case_images: The bone volume following regeneration was satisfactory, and one short osseointegrated implant (4.75 x 7 mm) was placed in position 45 (Figs. 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17).