Cargando…
Dental implants with versus without peri-implant bone defects treated with guided bone regeneration
BACKGROUND: The guided bone regeneration (GBR) technique is highly successful for the treatment of peri-implant bone defects. The aim was to determine whether or not implants associated with GBR due to peri-implant defects show the same survival and success rates as implants placed in native bone wi...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medicina Oral S.L.
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4554234/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26330931 http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.52292 |
_version_ | 1782388027719417856 |
---|---|
author | Aloy-Prósper, Amparo Peñarrocha-Oltra, David Peñarrocha-Diago, Maria Peñarrocha-Diago, Miguel |
author_facet | Aloy-Prósper, Amparo Peñarrocha-Oltra, David Peñarrocha-Diago, Maria Peñarrocha-Diago, Miguel |
author_sort | Aloy-Prósper, Amparo |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The guided bone regeneration (GBR) technique is highly successful for the treatment of peri-implant bone defects. The aim was to determine whether or not implants associated with GBR due to peri-implant defects show the same survival and success rates as implants placed in native bone without defects. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with a minimum of two submerged dental implants: one suffering a dehiscence or fenestration defect during placement and undergoing simultaneous guided bone regeneration (test group), versus the other entirely surrounded by bone (control group) were treated and monitored annually for three years. Complications with the healing procedure, implant survival, implant success and peri-implant marginal bone loss were assessed. Statistical analysis was performed with non-parametric tests setting an alpha value of 0.05. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients and 326 implants were included (142 test, 184 control). One hundred and twenty-five dehiscences (average height 1.92±1.11) and 18 fenestrations (average height 3.34±2.16) were treated. At 3 years post-loading, implant survival rates were 95.7% (test) and 97.3% (control) and implant success rates were 93.6% and 96.2%, respectively. Mean marginal bone loss was 0.54 (SD 0.26 mm) for the test group and 0.43 (SD 0.22 mm) for the control group. No statistically significant differences between both groups were found. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of this study, implants with peri-implant defects treated with guided bone regeneration exhibited similar survival and success rates and peri-implant marginal bone loss to implants without those defects. Large-scale randomized controlled studies with longer follow-ups involving the assessment of esthetic parameters and hard and soft peri-implant tissue stability are needed. Key words:Guided bone regeneration, peri-implant defects, dental implants, marginal bone level, success rate, survival rate. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4554234 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Medicina Oral S.L. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-45542342015-09-01 Dental implants with versus without peri-implant bone defects treated with guided bone regeneration Aloy-Prósper, Amparo Peñarrocha-Oltra, David Peñarrocha-Diago, Maria Peñarrocha-Diago, Miguel J Clin Exp Dent Research BACKGROUND: The guided bone regeneration (GBR) technique is highly successful for the treatment of peri-implant bone defects. The aim was to determine whether or not implants associated with GBR due to peri-implant defects show the same survival and success rates as implants placed in native bone without defects. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with a minimum of two submerged dental implants: one suffering a dehiscence or fenestration defect during placement and undergoing simultaneous guided bone regeneration (test group), versus the other entirely surrounded by bone (control group) were treated and monitored annually for three years. Complications with the healing procedure, implant survival, implant success and peri-implant marginal bone loss were assessed. Statistical analysis was performed with non-parametric tests setting an alpha value of 0.05. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients and 326 implants were included (142 test, 184 control). One hundred and twenty-five dehiscences (average height 1.92±1.11) and 18 fenestrations (average height 3.34±2.16) were treated. At 3 years post-loading, implant survival rates were 95.7% (test) and 97.3% (control) and implant success rates were 93.6% and 96.2%, respectively. Mean marginal bone loss was 0.54 (SD 0.26 mm) for the test group and 0.43 (SD 0.22 mm) for the control group. No statistically significant differences between both groups were found. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of this study, implants with peri-implant defects treated with guided bone regeneration exhibited similar survival and success rates and peri-implant marginal bone loss to implants without those defects. Large-scale randomized controlled studies with longer follow-ups involving the assessment of esthetic parameters and hard and soft peri-implant tissue stability are needed. Key words:Guided bone regeneration, peri-implant defects, dental implants, marginal bone level, success rate, survival rate. Medicina Oral S.L. 2015-07-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4554234/ /pubmed/26330931 http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.52292 Text en Copyright: © 2015 Medicina Oral S.L. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Aloy-Prósper, Amparo Peñarrocha-Oltra, David Peñarrocha-Diago, Maria Peñarrocha-Diago, Miguel Dental implants with versus without peri-implant bone defects treated with guided bone regeneration |
title | Dental implants with versus without peri-implant bone
defects treated with guided bone regeneration |
title_full | Dental implants with versus without peri-implant bone
defects treated with guided bone regeneration |
title_fullStr | Dental implants with versus without peri-implant bone
defects treated with guided bone regeneration |
title_full_unstemmed | Dental implants with versus without peri-implant bone
defects treated with guided bone regeneration |
title_short | Dental implants with versus without peri-implant bone
defects treated with guided bone regeneration |
title_sort | dental implants with versus without peri-implant bone
defects treated with guided bone regeneration |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4554234/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26330931 http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.52292 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT aloyprosperamparo dentalimplantswithversuswithoutperiimplantbonedefectstreatedwithguidedboneregeneration AT penarrochaoltradavid dentalimplantswithversuswithoutperiimplantbonedefectstreatedwithguidedboneregeneration AT penarrochadiagomaria dentalimplantswithversuswithoutperiimplantbonedefectstreatedwithguidedboneregeneration AT penarrochadiagomiguel dentalimplantswithversuswithoutperiimplantbonedefectstreatedwithguidedboneregeneration |