Preoperative Implant Evaluation and Complications of Treatment Planning

  • Mark R. StevensEmail author
  • Kyle Frazier


The foundation of implant therapy is proper preoperative evaluation and the formation of an appropriate treatment plan. If a practitioner has all the skills to accomplish the most complex implant treatments but fails to properly plan their cases, the treatment is destined to fail. This chapter will review all components of the initial evaluation including review of the patient’s medical history, soft and hard tissue evaluation, alveolar ridge assessment, and dental arch assessment. Guidelines are given for ideal implant positioning. In addition, virtual surgical planning is discussed as an emerging technology for preoperative evaluation and planning. Finally, a list of common complications and likely root causes is provided.


Preoperative evaluation Complications Treatment planning Virtual surgical planning Hard tissue Soft tissue Root cause Alveolar ridge assessment Dental arch assessment Ideal implant positioning 


  1. 1.
    Leventhal GS. Titanium, a metal for surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1951;33:473–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bothe RT, et al. Reaction of bone to multiple metallic implants. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1940;71:592–602.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Abraham CM. A brief historical perspective on dental implants, their surface coatings and treatments. Open Dent J. 2014;8:50–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schimmel M, Müller F, Suter V, Buser D. Implants for elderly patients. Periodontology. 2016;2000(73):228–40.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Moraschini V, Poubel LDC, Ferreira V, Barboza EDS. Evaluation of survival and success rates of dental implants reported in longitudinal studies with a follow-up period of at least 10 years: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;44:377–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kihara H, Sun J, Sakai M, Nagai S, Silva JD. A survey of dental implant instruction in predoctoral dental curricula in North America. J Dent Educ. 2017;81:1085–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Figgener L, Kleinheinz J. Implant dentistry at the focus of liability lawsuits. J Prosthet Dent. 2005;93:50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Saadoun AP, Le Gall MG, Touati B. Current trends in implantology: Part 1 – biological response, implant stability, and implant design. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent. 2004;16(7):529–35.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Panossian AJ, Block MS. Evaluation of the smile: facial and dental considerations. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;68:547–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Oosthuizen JC, Burns P, Timon C. The changing face of informed surgical consent. J Laryngol Otol. 2011;126:236–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Misch CE. Contemporary implant dentistry. St. Louis, MO: Mosby Elsevier; 2008.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Abu Hantash RO, Al-Omiri MK, Al-Wahadni AM. Psychological impact on implant patients’ oral healthrelated quality of life. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006;17:116–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    De-Freitas N, et al. Bisphosphonate treatment and dental implants: a systematic review. Med Oral Patol Oral Cirugia Bucal. 2016;21(5):e644–51.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Olsson M, Lindhe J. Periodontal characteristics in individuals with varying form of the upper central incisors. J Clin Periodontol. 1991;18:78–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Touati B, Rompen E, Van Dooren E. A new concept for optimizing soft tissue integration. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent. 2005;17(10):711–2, 714–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lee A, Fu J-H, Wang H-L. Soft tissue biotype affects implant success. Implant Dentistry. 2011;20:38–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sclar AG. Soft tissue and esthetic considerations in implant therapy. Quintessence. 2003;Chapter 2:24–5.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Atsuta I, et al. Soft tissue sealing around dental implants based on histological interpretation. J Prosthodont Res. 2016;60:3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tarnow DP, Magner AW, Fletcher P. The effect of the distance from the contact point to the crest of bone on the presence or absence of the interproximal dental papilla. J Periodontol. 1992;63:995–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Benson BW, Shetty V. Dental implants. In: White SC, Pharoah MJ, editors. Oral radiology: principles and interpretation. St. Louis, MO: Mosby Elsevier; 2009. p. 597–612.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chan H-L, Misch K, Wang H-L. Dental imaging in implant treatment planning. Implant Dent. 2010;19:288–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Al-Ekrish AA, Ekram M. A comparative study of the aacuracy and reliability of multidetector computed tomography and cone beam computed tomography in the assessment of dental implant site dimension. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2011;40:67–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kobayashi K, Shimoda S, Nakagawa Y, Yamamoto A. Accuracy in measurement of distance using limited cone beam computerized tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004;19:228–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Loubele M, Van Assche N, Carpentier K, Maes F, Jacobsi R, van Steenberghe D, et al. Comparative localized linear accuracy of small-field cone beam CT and multislice CT for alveolar bone measurements. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2008;105:512–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Suomalainen A, Vehmas T, Kortesniemi M, Robinson S, Peltola J. Accuracy of linear measurements using dental cone beam and conventional multislice computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2008;37:10–7.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lekholm U, Zarb GA. Patient selection and preparation. In: Branemark PI, Zarb GA, Albrektsson T, editors. Tissue-integrated prostheses: osseointegration in clinical dentistry. Chicago, IL: Quintessence Publishing Co., Inc.; 1985. p. 199–209.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Juodzbalys G, Sakavicius D, Wang H-L. Classification of extraction sockets based upon soft and hard tissue components. J Periodontol. 2008;79:413–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Misch CE. Dental implant prosthetics. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2005. p. 168.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Carpentieri J, Greenstein G, Cavallaro J. Hierarchy of restorative space required for different types of dental implant prostheses. J Am Dent Assoc. 2019;150:695–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Scherer MD. Presurgical implant-site assessment and restoratively driven digital planning. Dent Clin N Am. 2014;58:561–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Orentlicher G, Goldsmith D, Abboud M. Computer-guided planning and placement of dental implants. Atlas Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin. 2012;20:53–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeryAugusta University Dental College of GeorgiaAugustaUSA

Personalised recommendations