case_images: PMC3654637_01
case_images: Preoperative view of the posterior left first molar, number 36.
case_images: CRIM.DENTISTRY2013-854062.001.jpg
case_images: PMC3654637_01_CRIM.DENTISTRY2013-854062.001.jpg
case_images: fig1
case_images: After two months, the patient reported back again for the prosthetic replacement of the molar (Figures 1 and 2).
case_images: Preoperative radiograph of tooth, number 36, note the good height of the alveolar bone.
case_images: CRIM.DENTISTRY2013-854062.002.jpg
case_images: PMC3654637_01_CRIM.DENTISTRY2013-854062.002.jpg
case_images: fig2
case_images: After two months, the patient reported back again for the prosthetic replacement of the molar (Figures 1 and 2).
case_images: Crestal incision made along the crest of the ridge.
case_images: CRIM.DENTISTRY2013-854062.003.jpg
case_images: PMC3654637_01_CRIM.DENTISTRY2013-854062.003.jpg
case_images: fig3
case_images: Briefly, after induction of local anesthesia, a crystal incision was made along the crest of the ridge using Bard-Parker number 12 surgical blade, bisecting the existing keratinized mucosa (Figure 3).
case_images: Broad buccolingual width of the residual ridge.
case_images: CRIM.DENTISTRY2013-854062.004.jpg
case_images: PMC3654637_01_CRIM.DENTISTRY2013-854062.004.jpg
case_images: fig4
case_images: A full thickness mucoperiosteal flap was raised buccally and lingually to the level of mucogingival junction, exposing the underlined ridge of the implant site, and a ridge alveoplasty was performed with the help of 0.2 mm round bur to achieve a flat bone surface of sufficient width (Figure 4).
case_images: Pilot drill is used to increase the osteotomy site to confirm position and angulation.
case_images: CRIM.DENTISTRY2013-854062.005.jpg
case_images: PMC3654637_01_CRIM.DENTISTRY2013-854062.005.jpg
case_images: fig5
case_images: After pilot drill application, the implant site was prepared with the corresponding size of parallel drill (Figure 5).
case_images: Wrench used for tightening implant.
case_images: CRIM.DENTISTRY2013-854062.006.jpg
case_images: PMC3654637_01_CRIM.DENTISTRY2013-854062.006.jpg
case_images: fig6
case_images: The implants were placed in the recipient site by means of an insertion device, and a torque driver set at 35 N cm which was used to evaluate primary stability of implant (Figure 6).
case_images: Implant placed into the osteotomy site.
case_images: CRIM.DENTISTRY2013-854062.007.jpg
case_images: PMC3654637_01_CRIM.DENTISTRY2013-854062.007.jpg
case_images: fig7
case_images: The implant neck was positioned at the crystal bone level or slightly submerged (Figure 7).
case_images: Radiographic view of the implant after surgery.
case_images: CRIM.DENTISTRY2013-854062.008.jpg
case_images: PMC3654637_01_CRIM.DENTISTRY2013-854062.008.jpg
case_images: fig8
case_images: Intraoral periapical radiograph was taken immediately after surgery (Figure 8).
case_images: Clinical view of the final restoration at six weeks after surgery.
case_images: CRIM.DENTISTRY2013-854062.009.jpg
case_images: PMC3654637_01_CRIM.DENTISTRY2013-854062.009.jpg
case_images: fig9
case_images: The temporary restoration was replaced with permanent restoration after six weeks (Figure 9).
case_images: Clinical view of the final restoration at 12 months after surgery.
case_images: CRIM.DENTISTRY2013-854062.010.jpg
case_images: PMC3654637_01_CRIM.DENTISTRY2013-854062.010.jpg
case_images: fig10
case_images: The crown restoration was cemented and followup of one year of implant survival was assessed (Figure 10).