Main Podium Presentations
Main Podium presentations are open to all attendees and feature world-class experts in several areas of implant dentistry.
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Wednesday, October 3, 2012
1:30 pm - 2:30 pm
Wisdom from Periodontics to Implant Esthetics: Realities of Esthetic Outcomes and Limitations in Implant Dentistry
AGD Subject Code: 691
Arnold S. Weisgold, DDS
- Fellow, American College of Dentists
- Life Fellow, American Academy of Restorative Dentistry
- Practice limited to Prosthodontics (Retired)
As critical as shade matching is to esthetic success, our ability to create a restoration that will emerge from the sulcus in the same fashion as does a natural tooth is equally demanding. This program will explore when we can achieve this, but more importantly, when we cannot. Crown and root form, root inclination, emergence profile, and the periodontal biotypes will be discussed. A full understanding of these factors should enhance our ability to develop life-like restorations whether they be natural teeth, implants, or pontics.
Learning Objectives:
1. Differentiate between the tooth forms consistent with the thick/flat and thin/scalloped periodontia
2. List the differences between the root forms and inclinations in the square tooth vs. the triangular one
3. Cite commonly occurring long-term esthetic complications surrounding anterior implants, even when performed under optimal conditions
2:30 pm - 3:30 pm
Wisdom from Implant Treatment Planning through the Last Five Decades
AGD Subject Code: 691
Leonard Linkow, DDS, DMS
- Past President and Honored Fellow, American Academy of Implant Dentistry
- Diplomate, American Board of Oral Implantology/Implant Dentistry
- Professor, Department of Implant Dentistry, New York University College of Dentistry
- Author, 13 implant dentistry-related books
Since the introduction of implants to mainstream treatment options three decades ago, the profession has seen a plethora of innovations developed and promoted as state of the art. A close look at these features and procedures will reveal that the discipline has come full circle. Some of the designs, protocols and techniques currently being utilized had their inception through the pioneering efforts of the speaker. This presentation will showcase the ingenuity of the procedures done some five decades ago and implemented today as the often preferred method of implant treatment. Some of the origins of immediate function, “restorations in an appointment,” prosthetic connections, grafting techniques, flapless procedures and other evolved concepts will be highlighted.
Learning Objectives:
1. Compare and contrast the history and evolution of modern implant design features and their relevance to current treatment planning
2. Apply the principles of biomechanics and implant support during diagnosis
3. Understand the multi-modal approach of customizing the implant options based on treatment needs rather than trying to fit the patient to the implant system.
3:30 pm - 4:00 pm
25 Years of Immediate Loading - Where Do We Go from Here?
AGD Subject Code: 694
Paul Schnitman, DDS
- Honored Fellow, American Academy of Implant Dentistry
- Diplomate and Past President, American Board of Oral Implantology/Implant Dentistry
- Former Chair, Department of Implant Dentistry, Harvard University
The benefit of reduced treatment time, surgery and management problems associated with immediate loading is not without limitations. This program will trace, through case based presentations, how the presenter first used immediate loading with freehand Brånemark implants, and then refined it with digitally guided technology and prognostic tests to turn fear of failure into evidence based success.
Learning Objectives:
1. Understand the history, development and limitations of immediate loading
2. Describe the use of prognostic technologies for selection of implants to be immediately loaded, exposed or submerged
3. Understand CT based 3D software and the benefit of digital implant dentistry in immediate loading
|
4:00 pm - 5:30 pm
DEBATE #1 Implant Dimensions - Long vs. Short
Do We Need Bone Augmentation? Does Length Matter?
Implant treatment planning has always relied upon length as a predictor of long term success. Literature is replete with statistics that favored longer implants till 2000. With the advent of short implants and improved surfaces, there is an increasing interest in the use of short implants that can often avoid additional grafting procedures and increased treatment time. What should be the minimal length of an implant to ensure long term success? This debate will explore the controversy of length from an evidence-based model and clinical practice.
|
Back to the top
Thursday, October 4, 2012
|
8:00 am - 9:30 am
DEBATE #2 Esthetics - Ceramics vs. Gingiva
Achieving perfection with implant esthetics can be challenging and generally involves multiple surgical interventions. Alternatives such as pink ceramics have also been used successfully to treat esthetic blemishes around implants. If one can prognosticate which approach would be predictable - This would be important to consider in complex treatment planning. The patient can then make the important decision on whether to go through multiple corrective surgeries or simply consider pink ceramics to compensate for the deficiencies. This debate will discuss important surgical vs restorative choices.
|
|
10:30 am - Noon
DEBATE #3 Treatment Planning - Bioengineering vs. Design Engineering
Full Arch Treatment plans with implants have several options ranging from a few implants to an implant for every tooth being replaced. Philosophies of implant biomechanics, force distribution, cantilevers have all been explored. But there remains the issue - how many implants do we need for a full arch reconstruction? The number of implants has economical, functional and time considerations that impact on case acceptance and morbidity. This debate will attempt to establish some guidelines for considering options for full arch reconstruction.
|
|
1:30 pm - 3:00 pm
DEBATE #4 Treatment Options - Comprehensive vs. Conformative
Comprehensive care and ideal treatment plans are considered as the first option in treatment planning, but there are several extenuating factors wherein one could consider an optimal plan with an alternate approach. These ideal plans sometimes require a multi-disciplinary approach with protracted treatment time. Optimal plans are innovative, time saving and though sometimes considered experimental or old fashioned provide for some outstanding outcomes. This debate will discuss strategies to implement comprehensive plans and offer alternate solutions with minimally invasive techniques.
|
4:00 pm - 5:00 pm
Facial Esthetics and Implants
AGD Subject Code: 016
Louis J. Malcmacher, DDS
- Diplomate, American Academy of Facial Esthetics
- Master, Academy of General Dentistry
- Fellow, World Clinical Laser Institute
- President, American Academy of Facial Esthetics
This course will introduce attendees to the fastest growing area of dentistry - total facial esthetics. Facial esthetics with Botox and dermal fillers are having a dramatic impact on dental diagnosis and treatment planning. When combined with dental implant therapy, the dental professional now has complete control over all aspects of total facial esthetics, phonetics, and complete dental therapeutics. Course attendees will see new innovative techniques to treat the frustrating problem of "black triangles" and to complement their dental implant treatment plans.
Learning Objectives:
1. Learn how facial injectables such as Botox and dermal fillers are integrated into dental implant treatment plans
2. See new innovative techniques in the use of dermal fillers to correct deficient interdental papilla (black triangles)
3. Understand the role of Botox in dental therapeutic therapy for TMJ syndrome and bruxism
4. Learn the mechanism of action of botulinum toxin and dermal fillers
5:00 pm - 5:30 pm
Facial Plastic Surgery, When Botox and Dermal Fillers Aren't Enough
AGD Subject Code: 492
Leo Keegan, MD
- Assistant Clinical Professor, Plastic Surgery, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York
- Diplomate, Board of Plastic Surgery
Botox and Dermal Fillers are becoming quite popular minimally invasive procedures. As the American Society of Plastic Surgeons reported in March 2012 that Americans spent nearly $10 billion on cosmetic procedures in 2011 and of that total - $1.7 billion was spent on injectable procedures. Over the past several years an increasing number of dentists have been performing facial esthetics with injectable procedures. This presentation is designed to show which patients are the best candidates for these procedures, what the limitations are and which patients are better suited for surgical facial plastic surgery.
Learning Objectives:
1. Understand how to evaluate the patient for facial esthetic procedure
2. Understand the difference between neurotoxins and dermal fillers for treating facial esthetics
3. Identify which patients are good or poor candidates for injectable procedures
4. Understand the different types of facial surgical procedures such as blepharoplasty, rhytidectomy (Face Lifts) chemical peel, Laser Skin resurfacing, browplasty (forehead lift) cheek augmentation, chin augmentation, rhinoplasty, lip enhancement surgery are indicated
Back to the top
Friday, October 5, 2012
|
8:00 am - 9:30 am
DEBATE #5 Grafting - Plain and Simple vs. Bells and Whistles
Management of bone atrophy and prevention of alveolar bone loss have created an entire discipline of bone grafting techniques. This debate explores the treatment options available for grafting procedures from simple inexpensive allografts to the more costly recombinate materials and other additives for bone enhancements. Some of the traditional materials have been tested over several decades while others have been in use for only a couple of years. How does one determine what type of graft material would be applicable for managing bone deficiencies? Do we need a combination of materials? If so what is the recommended mix, percentages, use of membranes, types of closures and other variables? The recipe can be so confusing that we fail to understand the mechanism or the rationale behind the pathophysiology of grafting procedures. The debate will address the range of materials in use today and will attempt to create a logical approach in the management of bone preservation and atrophy.
|
|
10:30 am - Noon
DEBATE #6 Placements - Guided Surgery vs. Free-hand Skilled Surgeries
Surgical principles in implant dentistry always relied upon bone sounding and visualization of the anatomical structures to facilitate implant surgery and osteotomy procedures. With the increasing application of Cone Beam radiography and CT Scans, the diagnosis of implant treatment planning has simplified volumetric evaluation of available bone. Sophisticated softwares are now available by many manufacturers to help facilitate implant surgery. Studies have shown that the accuracy level of implant placement has increased with the use of computer guided surgery. Many of the traditional surgeons still feel that guided surgery is applicable only in the presence of an abundance of available bone and that bone manipulation is not feasible with the guides. This debate will clarify the indications, limitations and the reliability of guided surgeries vs. free hand surgeries with intra-oral geometric devices.
|
|
1:30 pm - 3:00 pm
DEBATE #7 Implant Soft Tissue Esthetics - Biometrics vs Biomimetics
Soft Tissue management has been the nemesis of the esthetic zone. There are several guidelines established by researchers to categorize the risk factors associated with implant esthetics. Implant design, platform switching, microchannels are some of the concepts that have populated the newer implant configurations. There are diametrically opposite considerations when it comes to choice of implant design in the esthetic zone. This debate will analyze the biologic and biomechanical parameters that influence the soft tissue esthetics around implants.
|
|
4:00 pm - 5:30 pm
DEBATE #8 Block Grafts - Autogenous vs. Allogenic
Autogenous grafts have been considered the gold standards, nevertheless there is an increasing shift in the utilization of allogenic grafts when it comes to volumetric increase in width and height of atrophic bone. Patients need to know the benefits and risks associated with grafting procedures. Although invasive, many of the long term results have shown favorable outcomes with autogenous sources. Are we now ready to adopt an alternative method to avoid donor site morbidity? Or is the predictability so high that we still need to consider the autogenous option since it is second to none? This debate will compare and contrast the various autogenous methods of harvesting bone and its long term results, with some of the newer allogenic source of particulate and block grafts.
|
Back to the top
Saturday, October 6, 2012
|
8:00 am - 9:30 am
DEBATE #9 Vertical Augmentation - Vascularized Osteotomies vs. Guided Bone Regeneration
Vertical alveolar bone augmentation has been the most challenging procedure in implant dentistry. Various techniques from onlay grafting to GBR methods have produced inconsistent results. The debaters on this topic have had many years of success with procedures they have perfected. This session will discuss the merits of particulate grafts materials along with GBR procedures and the advantages of having native bone through vascularized osteotomy techniques for vertical augmentation. The audience will have an opportunity to witness the sequential methods employed in both procedures and evaluate the predictability if they were to replicate it.
|
|
10:30 am - Noon
DEBATE #10 Prosthetics - Glass Ceramics vs. Metal Ceramics
Prosthetic materials have undergone revolutionary changes from all metallic restorations to all ceramic complete arch reconstructions. The debate will clarify the indications of complex milled zirconia and titanium frameworks and the related material interfaces for long-term integrity and biologic compatibility. Emphasis will be made on the choice of esthetic materials that will be used for fixed implant restorations. The limitations and advantages of newer zirconia framework and crowns will be explored. Will this mean traditional crown and bridge with metal is still the gold standard?
|
Back to the top