case_images: PMC4265518_01
case_images: Extensive exposure of molar furcation.
case_images: CRIM2014-307364.001.jpg
case_images: PMC4265518_01_CRIM2014-307364.001.jpg
case_images: fig1
case_images: X-rays showed granulomas with vertical bone reabsorption, rhizolysis, and extensive exposure of molar furcation (Figure 1).
case_images: Extensive apical osseous reabsorption.
case_images: CRIM2014-307364.002.jpg
case_images: PMC4265518_01_CRIM2014-307364.002.jpg
case_images: fig2
case_images: In the mandible, an extensive apical osseous reabsorption caused by endodontic cone beyond the apex was present at level 3.5 (Figures 2(a) and 2(b)).
case_images: Lateral cross bite, blocking behavior, and fracture of the prosthetic crown of 3.4 and signs of suffering with gum recession in the distal teeth.
case_images: CRIM2014-307364.003.jpg
case_images: PMC4265518_01_CRIM2014-307364.003.jpg
case_images: fig3
case_images: Fracture of the prosthetic crown of 3.4 and gum recession in the distal teeth (Figures 3(a) and 3(b)) were present also.
case_images: Postextractive implant site.
case_images: CRIM2014-307364.004.jpg
case_images: PMC4265518_01_CRIM2014-307364.004.jpg
case_images: fig4
case_images: MPI 4.2 x 11.5 in 3.6 and MPI 5 x 16 in 3.5 site.
case_images: CRIM2014-307364.005.jpg
case_images: PMC4265518_01_CRIM2014-307364.005.jpg
case_images: fig5
case_images: MPI (Ditron Dental, Israel) were placed in different sites: 4.2 x 16 in 3.4, 5 x 16 in 3.5, and 4.2 x 11.5 in 3.6 (Figures 5(a), 5(b), and 6).
case_images: Implants placed in premolars and molar site.
case_images: CRIM2014-307364.007.jpg
case_images: PMC4265518_01_CRIM2014-307364.007.jpg
case_images: fig7
case_images: The X-ray showed an optimum crestal and mesial distal position of the implants, as well as their excellent position to the surrounding bone (Figures 7-11).
case_images: Implants with abutment.
case_images: CRIM2014-307364.008.jpg
case_images: PMC4265518_01_CRIM2014-307364.008.jpg
case_images: fig8
case_images: The X-ray showed an optimum crestal and mesial distal position of the implants, as well as their excellent position to the surrounding bone (Figures 7-11).
case_images: Provisional prosthesis.
case_images: CRIM2014-307364.009.jpg
case_images: PMC4265518_01_CRIM2014-307364.009.jpg
case_images: fig9
case_images: The X-ray showed an optimum crestal and mesial distal position of the implants, as well as their excellent position to the surrounding bone (Figures 7-11).
case_images: X-ray showing an optimum crestal and mesial distal position of the implants.
case_images: CRIM2014-307364.010.jpg
case_images: PMC4265518_01_CRIM2014-307364.010.jpg
case_images: fig10
case_images: The X-ray showed an optimum crestal and mesial distal position of the implants, as well as their excellent position to the surrounding bone (Figures 7-11).
case_images: Provisional prosthesis.
case_images: CRIM2014-307364.011.jpg
case_images: PMC4265518_01_CRIM2014-307364.011.jpg
case_images: fig11
case_images: The X-ray showed an optimum crestal and mesial distal position of the implants, as well as their excellent position to the surrounding bone (Figures 7-11).
case_images: Removal of preexisting prosthesis.
case_images: CRIM2014-307364.012.jpg
case_images: PMC4265518_01_CRIM2014-307364.012.jpg
case_images: fig12
case_images: The fixed prosthesis was removed (Figure 12(a)) and the two molars were extracted with mini-invasive technique (Figures 12(b), 13(a), and 13(b)).
case_images: The two molars were extracted and implants positioned.
case_images: CRIM2014-307364.013.jpg
case_images: PMC4265518_01_CRIM2014-307364.013.jpg
case_images: fig13
case_images: The fixed prosthesis was removed (Figure 12(a)) and the two molars were extracted with mini-invasive technique (Figures 12(b), 13(a), and 13(b)).
case_images: Implants inserted in 2.5, 2.6, and 2.7 sites.
case_images: CRIM2014-307364.014.jpg
case_images: PMC4265518_01_CRIM2014-307364.014.jpg
case_images: fig14
case_images: The primary stability was excellent and the implants were immediately loaded using provisional Pek abutments (Figures 14, 15(a), 15(b), and 16).
case_images: Gingival sutures and provisional prosthesis.
case_images: CRIM2014-307364.015.jpg
case_images: PMC4265518_01_CRIM2014-307364.015.jpg
case_images: fig15
case_images: The primary stability was excellent and the implants were immediately loaded using provisional Pek abutments (Figures 14, 15(a), 15(b), and 16).