Bicon Dental Implants

Bicon Dental Implants is a privately owned company located in Boston, MA. The company specializes in short dental implants that use a locking taper or cold welding connection to secure the abutment to the implant. Bicon is notable and worthy of mention for the following three reasons: First, Bicon implants are extremely short in length.[1][2][3][4] The size of Bicon implants allow them to be placed in regions that are crowded with natural teeth and/or implants, or in regions that would otherwise require bone grafting.[5] Second, the implants do not have the screw-form design typical of other available implants.[6] Third, the abutments are connected to the implant via a locking taper. This is notable from both a medical and engineering standpoint as no other implant company offers an implant with a biological seal at the implant/abutment interface; almost all other implants possess an internal screw to connect their abutments.[6]

Bicon Dental Implants
TypePrivate company
IndustryDental Implants and Dental Prosthetics.
Founded1994
Headquarters
Boston, Massachusetts
,
United States
Area served
Worldwide
Key people
Vincent Morgan (president)
ProductsDental implants
implant abutments
individualized CAD/CAM prosthetics (abutments, crowns, bridges, overdenture bars)
components for guided surgery
dental drills
training and education for dental professionals
Number of employees
200
Website

History

Bicon has been in operation since June 1994. Prior to Bicon, its main product line was under the ownership of two other entities, Driskell Bioengineering (1985–1987) and Stryker Corporation (1988–1994) of Kalamazoo Michigan. The following section briefly describes the history of the Bicon company and the dental implant products that it offers.

Vietnam War

The style of implant offered by Bicon can trace its provenance to the Battelle Memorial Institute in Columbus, Ohio, where in 1968 the US Army Medical Research and Development Command Dental Research Division funded a project aimed at developing prosthetics to address the influx of craniofacial injuries sustained by personnel in the escalating Vietnam War.[7][8]

Research performed by the implant's inventor, Thomas Driskell, showed that a multi-finned plateau design more effectively distributed occlusal forces to the underlying bone as compared to contemporary screw form implants.[9] Using rhesus monkeys as an experimental animal, Driskell et al. were able to demonstrate direct bone-to-implant contact in the plateau style implant, a process called osseointegration.[9] Furthermore, the implant designed by Driskell possessed a sloping shoulder that, in later years, would be shown to play a role in the maintenance of crestal bone height and a natural looking interdental papillae.[10]

With the advent of the 1970s, renewed interest in the use of ceramics began to develop. In 1975, Driskell et al. unveiled the Synthodont implant, an implant made of high density aluminum oxide (Al2O3).[9] Unlike other conventional screw-type implants, the Synthodont implant design incorporated the use of the “fins” that had proved so successful in the U.S. Army project.[11][12][13]

Plateau Root Form (PRF) or "finned" dental implants of three different sizes.

1970s–1980s

In the late 1970s, following the initial successes of the Synthodont implant, Driskell et al. introduced the Titanodont implant. The Titanodont implant was composed of surgical grade titanium (grade 5, Ti-6Al-4V). The Titanodont implant was unique for three main reasons. First, the Titanodont implant allowed for complete interchangeability with abutments of varying diameters and angles. This interchangeability allowed for a more natural biological width. Second, the implant was grit blasted and acid etched, which provided both a larger surface area and preferable substrate for cells involved in osseointegration. Third, and perhaps most importantly, the Titanodont implant had a locking taper abutment connection, which allowed 360° of abutment positioning, along with a bacterial seal. Unlike screw-form implants, the locking taper connection design prevents the infiltration of bacteria into the implant crypt and surrounding tissues.[14][15][16]

1980s–1990s

In the mid 1980s, Driskell and his partners formed a company called DB Bioengineering. DB Bioengineering received pre-market notification in October, 1985 for the implant Driskell and his team had developed at Batelle – now known as the DB Precision Fin Implant System. Two short years later, in 1987, DB engineering – along with the DB Precision Fin Implant System – were sold to the multinational conglomerate, the Stryker Corporation.[17] At this juncture, the DB Precision Fin Implant System possessed the qualities that separated it (along with modern Bicon implants) from its competitors: a sloping shoulder, specialized titanium instrumentation, and a slow speed drilling system. Slow speed drilling was included in order to prevent the thermal damage induced by the high speeds conventional drilling.[18][19][20][21]

1990s – Present day

Following its purchase from DB Bioengineering, Stryker held control of the DB Precision Fin Implant System for 7 years.[22] Owing to its large size, as well as being more accustomed to dealing with purchasing agents at large hospitals, Stryker lacked the infrastructure necessary for direct interaction and sales with private practice dentists. In late 1993, Stryker made plans to sell the DB Precision Fin Implant System. Catching wind of the sale, Dr. Vincent Morgan (current owner and president of the company) along with other business partners, formed a group whose purpose was the acquisition of the implant system. In 1994, Stryker sold the DB Precision Fin Implant System to a group based in Boston which, at that point in time, had been renamed Bicon Dental Implants or simply Bicon (a name that is a portmanteau of the Latin “bi” – meaning two – and “con” – indicating the simple two-part design of the implant/abutment connection).[23]

Bicon's headquarters are located in Jamaica Plain, a historic neighborhood in Boston, Massachusetts.[24] The company employs 200 people and offers their implant system in 77 countries.

Reception

Bicon has been called “the smallest of the large implant companies.”[25] Manufactured in the United States for over 30 years, Bicon implants have been generally well received.[23][26][27][28] Because Bicon implants utilize a unique press-fit system instead of a screw, many clinicians have been hesitant to implement their use.[29] Other clinicians praise the Bicon implant design for both its ease of use, versatility, and cost effectiveness.[26][30] Like other dental companies that use or have used hydroxyapatite coated implants or hydroxyapatite derivatives (e.g. Zimmer, Straumann, Nobel Biocare, Dentsply, etc.), Bicon too has been criticized for the use of hydroxyapatite.[17][31] Bicon implants have also been criticized for their small size; however, following a series of scientific studies, these concerns were shown to have been unwarranted.[32][33][34][35][36][37]

Unbeknownst to its creators at the time, the Bicon implant design (i.e. namely the use of fins or plateaus, along with a hemispherical base) took advantage of a biological phenomenon called load bearing platform switching (LBPS).[10] Briefly, platform switching occurs when the diameters of the implant and abutment are unequal.[10] LBPS results when the hemispherical base of the abutment generates a load onto the tissue below it.[10] This mechanical stimuli induces bone repair and maintenance and results in crestal bone gain coronal to the implant.[10][38][39]

Bicon dental implants have been successfully functioning in patients since the inception of the product line in 1985. Implants retrieved after 18 years show evidence of lamellar bone consisting of multiple layers and multiple osteonic structures.[40][41] Depending on the surgical procedure, implant size, implant coating, and patient, the long-term survival rate for Bicon dental implants ranges from 92.2% to 100%.[27][40][41][42][43]

Products

In addition to dental implants, Bicon also offers implant-abutments, β-tricalcium phosphate,[44] and other dental restorative materials. As mentioned in the introduction, one of the reasons Bicon implants are notable (and also a source of criticism) is because of their small size. Bicon implants – referred to as short or ultrashort – can be as short as 5.0 mm. This allows the implants to be placed in regions that would otherwise require a sinus lift or bone graft.[35]

References
  1. Sánchez-Garcés, MA; Costa-Berenguer, X; Gay-Escoda, C (2012). "Short implants: a descriptive study of 273 implants". Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 14 (4): 508–516. doi:10.1111/j.1708-8208.2010.00301.x. PMID 20977605.
  2. Yi, YS; Emanuel, KM; Chuang, SK (2011). "Short (5.0 × 5.0 mm) Implant Placements and Restoration With Integrated Abutment Crowns". Implant Dent. 20 (2): 125–130. doi:10.1097/ID.0b013e31820fb67e. PMID 21448021.
  3. Birdi, H; Schulte, J; Kovacs, A; Weed, M; Chuang, SK (2010). "Crown-to-implant ratios of short-length implants". J Oral Implantol. 36 (6): 425–433. doi:10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-09-00071. PMID 20545533.
  4. Schulte, John; Flores, Arturo; Weed, Meghan (2007). "Crown-to-implant ratios of single tooth implant-supported restorations". J Prosthet Dent. 98 (1): 1–5. doi:10.1016/S0022-3913(07)60031-6. PMID 17631168.
  5. Davydova, OB; Kostin, IO (2012). "Experience of using short Bicon implants for treatment of partial and complete teeth loss". Stomatologiia (Mosk). 91 (6): 59–62. PMID 23268222.
  6. Misch, Carl E (2008). Contemporary Implant Dentistry (3rd ed.). St. Louis: Elvesier. pp. 1–200. ISBN 9780323043731.
  7. Khot, Sandeep; Park, Buhm; Longstreth, WT (2011). "The Vietnam War and medical research: untold legacy of the U.S. Doctor Draft and the NIH "Yellow Berets"". Acad Med. 86 (4): 502–508. doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e31820f1ed7. PMID 21346494.
  8. Driskell, Thomas; O'Hara, Martin; Niesz, Dale (1972). Surgical Tooth Implants, Combats and Field. Battelle Columbus Labs Ohio: Defense Technical Information Center. p. 35.
  9. Driskell, TD; Heller, AL (1977). "Clinical use of aluminum oxide endosseous implants". J Oral Implantol. 7 (1): 53–76. PMID 273703.
  10. Urdaneta, Rainier A; Seemann, Rudolf; Dragan, Irina-Florentina; Lubelski, William; Leary, Joseph; Chuang, Sung-Kiang (2014). "A retrospective radiographic study on the effect of natural tooth-implant proximity and an introduction to the concept of a bone-loading platform switch". Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 29 (6): 1412–1424. doi:10.11607/jomi.3699. PMID 25397804.
  11. Bhaskar, SN; Cutright, DE; Knapp, MJ; Beasley, JD; Perez, B; Driskell, TD (1971). "Tissue reaction to intrabony ceramic implants". Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 31 (2): 281–289. doi:10.1016/0030-4220(71)90086-7. PMID 5277379.
  12. Brånemark, Per-Ingvar (1983). "Osseointegration and its experimental background". J Prosthet Dent. 50 (3): 399–410. doi:10.1016/s0022-3913(83)80101-2. PMID 6352924.
  13. Leonard, Gary; Coelho, PG; Polyzois, Ioannis; Stassen, Leo; Claffey, Noel (2009). "A study of the bone healing kinetics of plateau versus screw root design titanium dental implants". Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 20 (3): 232–239. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01640.x. PMID 19397634.
  14. Zipprich, H; Weigl, P; Lauer, HC (2009). "Micromovements at the implant-abutment interface: Measurement, causes, and consequences". Implantolgie. 15: 31–45.
  15. Harder, Sonke; Dimaczek, Birka; Acil, Yaha; Terheyden, Hendrik; Freitag-Wolf, Sandra; Kern, Matthias (2010). "Molecular leakage at implant-abutment connection – in vitro investigation of tightness of internal conical implant-abutment connections against endotoxin penetration". Clin Oral Investig. 14 (4): 427–432. doi:10.1007/s00784-009-0317-x. PMID 19629543.
  16. Berberi, Antoine; Tehnini, Georges; Rifai, Khaldoun; Eddine, Farrah Bou Nasser; El Zein, Nabil; Badran, Bassam; Akl, Haidar (2014). "In Vitro Evaluation of Leakage at Implant-Abutment Connection of Three Implant Systems Having the Same Prosthetic Interface Using Rhodamine B". Int J Dent. 2014: 351263. doi:10.1155/2014/351263. PMC 4037604. PMID 24899896.
  17. Watson, CJ; Tinsely, D; Ogden, AR; Rusell, JL; Mulay, S; Davidson, EM (1999). "A 3 to 4 year study of single tooth hydroxylapatite coated endosseous dental implants". Br Dent J. 187 (2): 90–94. doi:10.1038/sj.bdj.4800211a. PMID 10464988.
  18. Eriksson, RA; Adell, R (1986). "Temperatures during drilling for the placement of implants using the osseointegration technique". J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 44 (1): 4–7. doi:10.1016/0278-2391(86)90006-6. PMID 3455722.
  19. Iyer, S; Weiss, C; Mehta, A (1997). "Effects of drill speed on heat production and the rate and quality of bone formation in dental implant osteotomies. Part II: Relationship between drill speed and healing". Int J Prosthodont. 10 (6): 536–540. PMID 9495174.
  20. Sharawy, M; Misch, CE; Weller, N; Tehemar, S (2002). "Heat generation during implant drilling: the significance of motor speed". J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 60 (10): 1160–1169. doi:10.1053/joms.2002.34992. PMID 12378492.
  21. Kim, SJ; Yoo, J; Kim, Y-S (2010). "Temperature change in pig rib bone during implant site preparation by low-speed drilling". J. Appl. Oral Sci. 18 (5): 522–527. doi:10.1590/S1678-77572010000500016. PMC 4246386. PMID 21085811.
  22. Nordin, Carl. "The History of the Bicon Design" (PDF). Bicon Dental Implants. Bicon.
  23. Henry, Kevin. "Discussing SHORT implants with Dr. Vincent Morgan". dentaleconomics.com/index.html. Dentistry IQ.
  24. Sullivan, Buckingham. "Bicon Building". Sullivan Buckingham Architects. Sullivan Buckingham Architects. Archived from the original on 2015-02-22.
  25. Cress, Doug. "Bicon: Smallest of the Large Dental Implant Manufacturers". onemedplace. one med market. Retrieved 2008-01-02.
  26. Collins, Mark. "Cost Effectiveness of General Dentists Using Bicon Implants". dentaltown.com/dentaltown/magazine.aspx. Dentaltown Magazine.
  27. Karthikeyan, I; Desai, Shrikar R; Singh, Rika (2012). "Short implants: A systematic review". J Indian Soc Periodontol. 16 (3): 302–312. doi:10.4103/0972-124X.100901. PMC 3498695. PMID 23162320.
  28. Meek, Mike; Tasch, David. "Back From Boston and Two Days with Bicon!". 38th Street Dental. Dr. Meek's Blog.
  29. Higgins, Radha. "Failing Bicon Implants". dental-implants-guide.com/index.html. Dental Implants Guide, Corp.
  30. Debenham, Clive. "The short implant: A long time coming". Premium Practice Dentistry. Premium Practice Dentistry. Archived from the original on 2014-12-02. Retrieved 2012-02-09.
  31. Albrektsson, Tomas (1998). "Hydroxyapatite-coated implants: A case against their use". J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 56 (11): 1312–1326. doi:10.1016/S0278-2391(98)90616-4. PMID 9820220.
  32. Venuleo, C; Chuang, SK; Weed, M; Dibart, Serge (2008). "Long term bone level stability on Short Implants: A radiographic follow up study". JMOSI. 7 (3): 340–345.
  33. Urdaneta, RA; Rodriguez, S; McNeil, C; Weed, M; Chuang, S-K (2010). "The effect of increased crown-to-implant ratio on single-tooth locking-taper implants". Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 25 (4): 729–743. PMID 20657868.
  34. Sharpe, Rochelle. "Are short implants getting the short shrift?". Dr.Bicuspid.com. Retrieved 2010-03-01.
  35. Urdaneta, Rainier A; Daher, Shadi; Lery, Joseph; Emanuel, Kimberly; Chuang, Sung-Kiang (2011). "Factors associated with crestal bone gain on single-tooth locking-taper implants: the effect of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs". Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 26 (5): 1063–1078. PMID 22010091.
  36. Urdaneta, Rainier A; Daher, Shadi; Leary, Joseph; Emanuel, Kimberly M; Chuang, Sung-Kiang (2012). "The survival of ultrashort locking-taper implants". Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 27 (3): 644–654. PMID 22616059.
  37. Urdaneta, Rainier A; Leary, Joseph; Lubelski, William; Emanuel, Kimberly M; Chuang, Sung-King (2012). "The effect of implant size 5 × 8 mm on crestal bone levels around single-tooth implants". J Periodontol. 83 (10): 1235–1244. doi:10.1902/jop.2012.110299. PMID 22309172.
  38. Wolff, Julius (1892). Das Gesetz der Transformation der Knochen. Berlin: Verlag von August Hirschwald. pp. 1–281. ISBN 9783868056488.
  39. Frost, HM (1987). "The mechanostat: a proposed pathogenic mechanism of osteoporoses and the bone mass effects of mechanical and nonmechanical agents". Bone Miner. 2 (2): 73–85. PMID 3333019.
  40. Coelho, Paulo G; Bonfante, Estevam A; Marin, Charles; Granato, Rodrigo; Giro, Gabriela; Suzuki, Marcelo (2010). "A human retrieval study of plasma-sprayed hydroxyapatite-coated plateau root form implants after 2 months to 13 years in function". J Long Term Eff Med Implants. 20 (4): 335–342. doi:10.1615/jlongtermeffmedimplants.v20.i4.80. PMID 21488826.
  41. Gil, Luiz F; Suzuki, Marcelo; Janal, Malyin N; Tovar, Nick; Marin, Charles; Granato, Rodrigo; Bonfante, Estevam A; Jimbo, Ryo; gil, Jose N; Coelho, Paulo G (2014). "Progressive plateau root form dental implant osseointegration: A human retrieval study". J Biomed Mater Res B. 103 (B): 1328–1332. doi:10.1002/jbm.b.33311. PMID 25367155.
  42. Chuang, SK; Wei, LJ; Douglass, CW; Dodson, TB (2002). "Risk Factors for Dental Implant Failure: A Strategy for the Analysis of Clustered Failure-time Observations". J Dent Res. 81 (8): 572–577. doi:10.1177/154405910208100814. PMID 12147750.
  43. Gentile, Michael A; Chuang, Sung-Kiang; Dodson, Thomas B (2005). "Survival estimates and risk factors for failure with 6 x 5.7-mm implants". Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 20 (6): 930–937. PMID 16392351.
  44. K. Müller:Klinische Erfahrung mit Beta-Tricalciumphosphat in der oralen Chirurgie. Quintessenz zahnärztl.Lit. Nr. 4/5 1985
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.