Influence of implant-abutment connection structure on peri-implant bone level in a second molar: A 1-year randomized controlled trial
2
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
PURPOSE. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of two different implant-abutment connection structures with identical implant design on peri-implant bone level. MATERIALS AND METHODS. This clinical study was a patient-blind randomized controlled trial following the CONSORT 2010 checklists. This trial was conducted in 24 patients recruited between March 2013 and July 2015. Implants with internal friction connection were compared to those with external hex connection. One implant for each patient was installed, replacing the second molar. Implant-supported crowns were delivered at four months after implant insertion. Standardized periapical radiographs were taken at prosthesis delivery (baseline), and one year after delivery. On the radiographs, distance from implant shoulder to first bone-to-implant contact (DIB) and peri-implant area were measured, which were the primary and secondary outcome, respectively. RESULTS. Eleven external and eleven internal implants were analyzed. Mean changes of DIB from baseline to 1-year postloading were 0.59 (0.95) mm for the external and 0.01 (0.68) mm for the internal connection. Although no significant differences were found between the two groups, medium effect size was found in DIB between the connections (Cohen’s d = 0.67). CONCLUSION. Considering the effect size in DIB, this study suggested the possibility of the internal friction connection structure for more effective preservation of marginal bone.
Abstract
PURPOSE. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of two different implant-abutment connection structures with identical implant design on peri-implant bone level. MATERIALS AND METHODS. This clinical study was a patient-blind randomized controlled trial following the CONSORT 2010 checklists. This trial was conducted in 24 patients recruited between March 2013 and July 2015. Implants with internal friction connection were compared to those with external hex connection. One implant for each patient was installed, replacing the second molar. Implant-supported crowns were delivered at four months after implant insertion. Standardized periapical radiographs were taken at prosthesis delivery (baseline), and one year after delivery. On the radiographs, distance from implant shoulder to first bone-to-implant contact (DIB) and peri-implant area were measured, which were the primary and secondary outcome, respectively. RESULTS. Eleven external and eleven internal implants were analyzed. Mean changes of DIB from baseline to 1-year postloading were 0.59 (0.95) mm for the external and 0.01 (0.68) mm for the internal connection. Although no significant differences were found between the two groups, medium effect size was found in DIB between the connections (Cohen’s d = 0.67). CONCLUSION. Considering the effect size in DIB, this study suggested the possibility of the internal friction connection structure for more effective preservation of marginal bone.
참고문헌 (36)
- Lorenz J, "Investigation of peri-implant tissue conditions and peri-implant tissue stability in implants placed with simultaneous augmentation procedure : a 3-year retrospective follow-up analysis of a newly developed bone level implant system", Int J Implant Dent, 3, pp.41~ (2017)
- Rotundo R, "Long-term outcomes of soft tissue augmentation around dental implants on soft and hard tissue stability : a systematic review", Clin Oral Implants Res, 26, pp.123~138 (2015)
- Misch CE, "Implant success, survival, and failure:the International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) Pisa Consensus Conference", Implant Dent, 17, pp.5~15 (2008)
- Albrektsson T, "Crestal bone loss and oral implants", Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 14, pp.783~791 (2012)
- Roccuzzo M, "Ten-year results of a three-arm prospective cohort study on implants in periodontally compromised patients. Part 1: implant loss and radiographic bone loss", Clin Oral Implants Res, 21, pp.490~496 (2010)
- Vigolo P, "Internal-vs external-connection single implants : A retrospective study in an italian population treated by certified prosthodontists", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 31, pp.1385~1396 (2016)
- Albrektsson T, "Is marginal bone loss around oral implants the result of a provoked foreign body reaction?", Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 16, pp.155~165 (2014)
- Baffone GM, "Influence of various implant platform configurations on peri-implant tissue dimensions : an experimental study in dog", Clin Oral Implants Res, 22, pp.438~444 (2011)
- Bateli M, "Implant neck configurations for preservation of marginal bone level : a systematic review", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 26, pp.290~303 (2011)
- Hermann JS, "Biologic width around titanium implants. A physiologically formed and stable dimension over time", Clin Oral Implants Res, 11, pp.1~11 (2000)
- Broggini N, "Peri-implant inflammation defined by the implant-abutment interface", J Dent Res, 85, pp.473~478 (2006)
- van Winkelhoff AJ, "Early colonization of dental implants by putative periodontal pathogens in partially edentulous patients", Clin Oral Implants Res, 11, pp.511~520 (2000)
- Nishioka RS, "Comparative strain gauge analysis of external and internal hexagon, Morse taper, and influence of straight and offset implant configuration", Implant Dent, 20, pp.e24~32 (2011)
- Ugurel CS, "Mechanical resistance of screwless morse taper and screw-retained implant-abutment connections", Clin Oral Implants Res, 26, pp.137~142 (2015)
- Peñarrocha-Diago MA, "Influence of implant neck design and implant-abutment connection type on peri-implant health. Radiological study", Clin Oral Implants Res, 24, pp.1192~1200 (2013)
- Pozzi A, "Clinical and radiological outcomes of two implants with different prosthetic interfaces and neck configurations : randomized, controlled, split-mouth clinical trial", Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 16, pp.96~106 (2014)
- Shin YK, "Radiographic evaluation of marginal bone level around implants with different neck designs after 1 year", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 21, pp.789~794 (2006)
- Astrand P, "Astra Tech and Brånemark system implants : a 5-year prospective study of marginal bone reactions", Clin Oral Implants Res, 15, pp.413~420 (2004)
- Lin MI, "A retrospective study of implant-abutment connections on crestal bone level", J Dent Res, 92, pp.202~ (2013)[DOI]
- Misch CE, "A posi-tive correlation between occlusal trauma and peri-implant bone loss : literature support", Implant Dent, 14, pp.108~116 (2005)
- Shinogaya T, "Bite force and occlusal load in healthy young subjects-a methodological study", Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent, 8, pp.11~15 (2000)
- Koo KT, "The effect of internal versus external abutment connection modes on crestal bone changes around dental implants : a radiographic analysis", J Periodontol, 83, pp.1104~1109 (2012)
- Canullo L, "Inward-inclined implant platform for the amplified platformswitching concept : 18-month follow-up report of a prospective randomized matched-pair controlled trial", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 27, pp.927~934 (2012)
- Schulz KF, "CONSORT 2010 statement : updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials", BMJ, 340, pp.c332~ (2010)
- Cohen J, "Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences", pp.20~27 (1988), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
- Crespi R, "Radiographic evaluation of marginal bone levels around platform-switched and non-platform-switched implants used in an immediate loading protocol", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 24, pp.920~926 (2009)
- Esposito M, "Dental implants with internal versus external connections : 5-year post-loading results from a pragmatic multicenter randomised controlled trial", Eur J Oral Implantol, 9, pp.129~141 (2016)
- De Angelis N, "Platform switching versus conventional technique:a randomized controlled clinical trial", Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 34, pp.s75~s79 (2014)
- Pozzi A, "Three-year post-loading results of a randomised, controlled, split-mouth trial comparing implants with different prosthetic interfaces and design in partially posterior edentulous mandibles", Eur J Oral Implantol, 7, pp.47~61 (2014)
- Caricasulo R, "The influence of implant-abutment connection to peri-implant bone loss : A systematic review and meta-analysis", Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 20, pp.653~664 (2018)
- Lemos CAA, "Comparison of external and internal implantabutment connections for implant supported prostheses. A systematic review and meta-analysis", J Dent, 70, pp.14~22 (2018)
- Palacios-Garzón N, "Comparison of marginal bone loss between implants with internal and external connections : A systematic review", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 33, pp.580~589 (2018)
- Hermann JS, "Influence of the size of the microgap on crestal bone changes around titanium implants. A histometric evaluation of unloaded non-submerged implants in the canine mandible", J Periodontol, 72, pp.1372~1383 (2001)
- Guerra E, "The impact of conical and nonconical abutments on bacterial infiltration at the implant-abutment interface", Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 36, pp.825~831 (2016)
- Khraisat A, "Fatigue resistance of two implant", abutment joint designs, 2002, pp.88, 604~610
- Yang TC, "The biomechanical effect of platform switching on external-and internal-connection implants", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 28, pp.143~147 (2013)