Question

My dentist told me that he would have to place implants. An implant would cost around 5,000 francs. In addition, a healing period of two to three months had to be expected after the preparatory work. Only then could the crown be placed. Now I ask myself why the same thing can be done in Hungary in ten days and even cheaper. What is the difference or is there a catch? D. B. in E. 

Short answer

In a study carried out at the University of Bern in 1999, 80 percent of Hungarian work was judged to be inadequate. Only in selected situations can implants be restored with crowns immediately after insertion. However, the risk of failure is higher. If there is not enough of the patient's own bone, this must be built up. This extends the healing time to four to six months.

Modern dental implants are screwed into the jawbone. Initially, the situation is similar to that of screws that are screwed into wood. However, this purely mechanical hold is insufficient for dental success. Within 2 months, the titanium implants grow so firmly into the bone (in contrast to wood) that they cannot be unscrewed again. If they are subjected to recurring loads during this healing period that move them more than 0.15 millimeters in the bone, healing is at risk. Loosening would then occur and the implants would be lost. Only in selected situations can implants be restored with crowns immediately after insertion (immediately or after a few days). However, the risk of failure is higher. 

Up to six months healing time 

In order to avoid unpleasant failures, every situation (bone size, bone quality, position, number, length of implants and the possibility of blocking, etc.) must be examined and assessed in advance, the risk assessed and discussed with the patient. If there is not enough of the patient's own bone, this must be built up beforehand or at the same time. This extends the healing time to 4 to 6 months. These scientific rules currently apply all over the world. Blanket claims for implants that are fitted with crowns and loaded within days have more to do with sales and advertising and less to do with professional, serious dentistry. 

Scientific study 

In 1999, a scientific study was conducted at the University of Bern. The teeth of patients who had undergone treatment during a short stay in Hungary or in Switzerland were examined. The examining dentists were not informed about the country of manufacture. 80% of the Hungarian work was assessed as poor, of which 39% was assessed as destructive, compared to 26% of poor work from Switzerland and no destructive work. The two highest standards, excellent and good, could never be awarded to Hungarian work, in contrast to 37% of work from Switzerland. The remaining works were rated as correctable. A German study from 2004 came to very similar results. Unfortunately, the damage caused to the patients concerned often becomes apparent years later, which is why many are initially satisfied with the work. 

Author: Dr. med. dent. Jürg Eppenberger
Published in: Neue Luzerner Zeitung on August 10, 2005