Marginal bone loss around crestal or subcrestal dental implants: prospective clinical study
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Objectives: The stability of crestal bone has been reported as a major factor in the success of dental implants. Implants can be placed in an equicrestal (crestal) or subcrestal position. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of implant depth placement on marginal bone loss. Materials and Methods: The study was created in a split-mouth design. Immediately after implant surgery, digital parallel radiographs were prepared and levels of bone were measured where marginal bone loss and bone level changes occurred. These measurements were repeated at 3-month and 6-month follow-up periods. Results: In this interventional study, 49 implants were evaluated in 18 patients. Primary bone height was not significant between the intervention and control groups in both mesial and distal aspects at 3 months and 6 months from the baseline. The mean marginal bone loss on the mesial side was 1.03 mm in the subcrestal group and 0.83 mm in the crestal group. In addition, mean marginal bone loss on the distal side was 0.88 mm and 0.81 mm in the subcrestal and crestal groups, respectively. Marginal bone loss was not significantly different between sexes, the maxilla or mandible, and in the anterior or posterior regions as well as between different lengths and diameters of implants. Conclusion: Based on the results of this study, there was no significant difference in terms of marginal bone loss between crestal and subcrestal implants.
Abstract
Objectives: The stability of crestal bone has been reported as a major factor in the success of dental implants. Implants can be placed in an equicrestal (crestal) or subcrestal position. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of implant depth placement on marginal bone loss. Materials and Methods: The study was created in a split-mouth design. Immediately after implant surgery, digital parallel radiographs were prepared and levels of bone were measured where marginal bone loss and bone level changes occurred. These measurements were repeated at 3-month and 6-month follow-up periods. Results: In this interventional study, 49 implants were evaluated in 18 patients. Primary bone height was not significant between the intervention and control groups in both mesial and distal aspects at 3 months and 6 months from the baseline. The mean marginal bone loss on the mesial side was 1.03 mm in the subcrestal group and 0.83 mm in the crestal group. In addition, mean marginal bone loss on the distal side was 0.88 mm and 0.81 mm in the subcrestal and crestal groups, respectively. Marginal bone loss was not significantly different between sexes, the maxilla or mandible, and in the anterior or posterior regions as well as between different lengths and diameters of implants. Conclusion: Based on the results of this study, there was no significant difference in terms of marginal bone loss between crestal and subcrestal implants.
참고문헌 (28)
- Borie E, "The influence of the connection, length and diameter of an implant on bone biomechanics", Acta Odontol Scand, 73, pp.321~329 (2015)[DOI]
- von Wilmowsky C, "Implants in bone: part II. Research on implant osseointegration:material testing, mechanical testing, imaging and histoanalytical methods", Oral Maxillofac Surg, 18, pp.355~372 (2014)[DOI]
- Chrcanovic BR, "Reasons for failures of oral implants", J Oral Rehabil, 41, pp.443~476 (2014)[DOI]
- Pellicer-Chover H, "Impact of crestal and subcrestal implant placement upon changes in marginal periimplant bone level. A systematic review", Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal, 24, pp.e673~e683 (2019)[DOI]
- Kowalski J, "Factors influencing marginal bone loss around dental implants : a narrative review", Coatings, 11, pp.865~ (2021)[DOI]
- Kütan E, "Clinical and radiographic evaluation of marginal bone changes around platformswitching implants placed in crestal or subcrestal positions : a randomized controlled clinical trial", Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 17(Suppl 2), pp.e364~e375 (2015)[DOI]
- Palacios-Garzón N, "Bone loss in implants placed at subcrestal and crestal level: a systematic review and meta-analysis", Materials(Basel), 12, pp.154~ (2019)[DOI]
- Puisys A, "The influence of mucosal tissue thickening on crestal bone stability around bone-level implants. A prospective controlled clinical trial", Clin Oral Implants Res, 26, pp.123~129 (2015)[DOI]
- Romanos GE, "Wound healing in immediately loaded implants", Periodontol 2000, 68, pp.153~167 (2015)[DOI]
- Hämmerle CH, "The effect of subcrestal placement of the polished surface of ITI implants on marginal soft and hard tissues", Clin Oral Implants Res, 7, pp.111~119 (1996)[DOI]
- Gatti C, "A prospective multicenter study on radiographic crestal bone changes around dental implants placed at crestal or subcrestal level : one-year findings", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 33, pp.913~918 (2018)[DOI]
- Veis A, "Evaluation of peri-implant marginal bone loss using modified abutment connections at various crestal level placements", Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 30, pp.609~617 (2010)
- Romanos GE, "Long-term results after subcrestal or crestal placement of delayed loaded implants", Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 17, pp.133~141 (2015)[DOI]
- Al Amri MD, "Soft tissue changes and crestal bone loss around platform-switched implants placed at crestal and subcrestal levels : 36-month results from a prospective split-mouth clinical trial", Clin Oral Implants Res, 28, pp.1342~1347 (2017)[DOI]
- de Siqueira RAC, "Effect of different implant placement depths on crestal bone levels and soft tissue behavior : a randomized clinical trial", Clin Oral Implants Res, 28, pp.1227~1233 (2017)[DOI]
- Ercoli C, "Influence of apico-coronal implant placement on post-surgical crestal bone loss in humans", J Periodontol, 88, pp.762~770 (2017)[DOI]
- Valles C, "Influence of subcrestal implant placement compared with equicrestal position on the peri-implant hard and soft tissues around platform-switched implants : a systematic review and meta-analysis", Clin Oral Investig, 22, pp.555~570 (2018)[DOI]
- Cruz RS, "Clinical comparison between crestal and subcrestal dental implants : a systematic review and metaanalysis", J Prosthet Dent, 127, pp.408~417 (2022)[DOI]
- Degidi M, "Equicrestal and subcrestal dental implants : a histologic and histomorphometric evaluation of nine retrieved human implants", J Periodontol, 82, pp.708~715 (2011)[DOI]
- Jung RE, "The influence of non-matching implant and abutment diameters on radiographic crestal bone levels in dogs", J Periodontol, 79, pp.260~270 (2008)[DOI]
- 이정명, "Marginal bony changes in relation to different vertical positions of dental implants", Journal of Periodontal & Implant Science, 40(5), pp.244~248 (2010), 대한치주과학회
- Pontes AE, "Clinical and radiographic changes around dental implants inserted in different levels in relation to the crestal bone, under different restoration protocols, in the dog model", J Periodontol, 79, pp.486~494 (2008)[DOI]
- Fetner M, "The effects of subcrestal implant placement on crestal bone levels and bone-to-abutment contact : a microcomputed tomographic and histologic study in dogs", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 30, pp.1068~1075 (2015)[DOI]
- Pedro RE, "Influence of age on factors associated with periimplant bone loss after prosthetic rehabilitation over osseointegrated implants", J Contemp Dent Pract, 18, pp.3~10 (2017)[DOI]
- Wagenberg B, "A retrospective study of 1925 consecutively placed immediate implants from 1988 to 2004", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 21, pp.71~80 (2006)
- 장희원, "A retrospective study on related factors affecting the survival rate of dental implants", The Journal of Advanced of Prosthodontics, 3(4), pp.204~215 (2011), 대한치과보철학회[DOI]
- Güven SŞ, "Local and systemic factors associated with marginal bone loss around dental implants : a retrospective clinical study", Quintessence Int, 51, pp.128~141 (2020)[DOI]
- Raikar S, "Factors affecting the survival rate of dental implants : a retrospective study", J Int Soc Prev Community Dent, 7, pp.351~355 (2017)[DOI]