Cargando…

Comparative Evaluation of Two Implant Designs Based on Bone Loss and Stability with Early Loading Method

The study evaluated the implant bone loss and stability of implant changes with diverse designs with early placement at eight weeks and eight months’ time. The subjects for the current study had partial tooth loss in the posterior mandibular arch. A total of 30 samples were split into two groups of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gasthi, Anjaneyulu, Rao, Udayagiri Madhusudhana, Alharethi, Naji, Awinashe, Vaibhav, Sayed, Arshad Jamal, Parihar, Anuj Singh, Manas, Abhigyan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10485410/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37694065
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_84_23
Descripción
Sumario:The study evaluated the implant bone loss and stability of implant changes with diverse designs with early placement at eight weeks and eight months’ time. The subjects for the current study had partial tooth loss in the posterior mandibular arch. A total of 30 samples were split into two groups of 15, one with a flared crest module and a buttress thread design, the other with a parallel crest module and a V-shaped thread design. Ostell assessed each subject’s implant stability four times, at baseline, eight weeks, four months, and eight months. At intervals of eight weeks, four months, and eight months, intraoral periapical radiographs were examined using ImageJ software to measure crestal bone loss. When Group I and Group II’s implant stability quotient (ISQ) values at baseline, eight weeks, four months, and eight months were compared; Group I’s ISQ values at each of the four measured time periods were statistically significant. At eight weeks in Group I, the ISQ value was very considerable. At eight weeks, four months, and eight months, there was a statistically significant bone loss in Group II in comparison to Group I. At eight months, Group II’s bone loss value was very considerable. In contrast to Group II implant designs, it was found that Group I implants demonstrated enhanced implant-less bone loss and stability.