Cargando…
Comparative evaluation of the stability of two different dental implant designs and surgical protocols—a pilot study
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare a parallel wall design implant to a tapered apex design implant when placed in the posterior maxilla using two different surgical protocols. METHODS: Twenty-seven patients (30 implants) were divided into three groups. All implants were 4 mm wide i...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5411487/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28466248 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40729-017-0078-2 |
_version_ | 1783232841449996288 |
---|---|
author | Simmons, David E. Maney, Pooja Teitelbaum, Austin G. Billiot, Susan Popat, Lomesh J. Palaiologou, A. Archontia |
author_facet | Simmons, David E. Maney, Pooja Teitelbaum, Austin G. Billiot, Susan Popat, Lomesh J. Palaiologou, A. Archontia |
author_sort | Simmons, David E. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare a parallel wall design implant to a tapered apex design implant when placed in the posterior maxilla using two different surgical protocols. METHODS: Twenty-seven patients (30 implants) were divided into three groups. All implants were 4 mm wide in diameter and 8 mm long. Group A received 10 tapered implants (OSPTX) (Astra Tech OsseoSpeed TX™) using the soft bone surgical protocol (TXSoft). Group B received 10 tapered implants (OSPTX) (AstraTech OsseoSpeedTX™) using the standard surgical protocol (TXStd). Group C received 10 parallel wall implants (OSP) (AstraTech OsseoSpeed™) using the standard surgical protocol (OStd). All implants were placed in the posterior maxilla in areas with a minimum of 8-mm crestal bone height. Resonance frequency measurements (implant stability quotient (ISQ)) and torque values were recorded to determine initial implant stability. All implants were uncovered 6 weeks after placement and restored with a functionally loaded resin provisional screw-retained crown. Resonance frequency measurements were recorded at the time of implant placement, at 6 weeks and 6 and 12 months. Twelve months after implant placement, the stability of the implants was recorded and the final restorations were placed using custom CAD/CAM fabricated abutments and cement-retained PFM DSIGN porcelain crowns. After implant restoration, bone levels were measured at 6 and 12 months with standardized radiographs. RESULTS: Radiographic mean bone loss was less than 0.5 mm in all groups, with no statistically significant differences between the groups. Implant survival rate at 1 year was 93.3%, with 2/30 implants failing to integrate prior to functional loading at 6 weeks. No statistically significant difference was found between ISQ measurements between the three groups at all time intervals measured. Strong positive correlations were found between overall bone loss at 6 months and insertion torque at time of placement. A very weak correlation was found between insertion torque and ISQ values at time of implant placement. CONCLUSIONS: Survival and stability of OSPTX and OSP implants is comparable. Osteotomy preparation by either standard or soft bone surgical protocol presented no significant effect on implant survival and stability for the specific implant designs. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5411487 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-54114872017-05-17 Comparative evaluation of the stability of two different dental implant designs and surgical protocols—a pilot study Simmons, David E. Maney, Pooja Teitelbaum, Austin G. Billiot, Susan Popat, Lomesh J. Palaiologou, A. Archontia Int J Implant Dent Research BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare a parallel wall design implant to a tapered apex design implant when placed in the posterior maxilla using two different surgical protocols. METHODS: Twenty-seven patients (30 implants) were divided into three groups. All implants were 4 mm wide in diameter and 8 mm long. Group A received 10 tapered implants (OSPTX) (Astra Tech OsseoSpeed TX™) using the soft bone surgical protocol (TXSoft). Group B received 10 tapered implants (OSPTX) (AstraTech OsseoSpeedTX™) using the standard surgical protocol (TXStd). Group C received 10 parallel wall implants (OSP) (AstraTech OsseoSpeed™) using the standard surgical protocol (OStd). All implants were placed in the posterior maxilla in areas with a minimum of 8-mm crestal bone height. Resonance frequency measurements (implant stability quotient (ISQ)) and torque values were recorded to determine initial implant stability. All implants were uncovered 6 weeks after placement and restored with a functionally loaded resin provisional screw-retained crown. Resonance frequency measurements were recorded at the time of implant placement, at 6 weeks and 6 and 12 months. Twelve months after implant placement, the stability of the implants was recorded and the final restorations were placed using custom CAD/CAM fabricated abutments and cement-retained PFM DSIGN porcelain crowns. After implant restoration, bone levels were measured at 6 and 12 months with standardized radiographs. RESULTS: Radiographic mean bone loss was less than 0.5 mm in all groups, with no statistically significant differences between the groups. Implant survival rate at 1 year was 93.3%, with 2/30 implants failing to integrate prior to functional loading at 6 weeks. No statistically significant difference was found between ISQ measurements between the three groups at all time intervals measured. Strong positive correlations were found between overall bone loss at 6 months and insertion torque at time of placement. A very weak correlation was found between insertion torque and ISQ values at time of implant placement. CONCLUSIONS: Survival and stability of OSPTX and OSP implants is comparable. Osteotomy preparation by either standard or soft bone surgical protocol presented no significant effect on implant survival and stability for the specific implant designs. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017-05-02 /pmc/articles/PMC5411487/ /pubmed/28466248 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40729-017-0078-2 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Research Simmons, David E. Maney, Pooja Teitelbaum, Austin G. Billiot, Susan Popat, Lomesh J. Palaiologou, A. Archontia Comparative evaluation of the stability of two different dental implant designs and surgical protocols—a pilot study |
title | Comparative evaluation of the stability of two different dental implant designs and surgical protocols—a pilot study |
title_full | Comparative evaluation of the stability of two different dental implant designs and surgical protocols—a pilot study |
title_fullStr | Comparative evaluation of the stability of two different dental implant designs and surgical protocols—a pilot study |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative evaluation of the stability of two different dental implant designs and surgical protocols—a pilot study |
title_short | Comparative evaluation of the stability of two different dental implant designs and surgical protocols—a pilot study |
title_sort | comparative evaluation of the stability of two different dental implant designs and surgical protocols—a pilot study |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5411487/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28466248 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40729-017-0078-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT simmonsdavide comparativeevaluationofthestabilityoftwodifferentdentalimplantdesignsandsurgicalprotocolsapilotstudy AT maneypooja comparativeevaluationofthestabilityoftwodifferentdentalimplantdesignsandsurgicalprotocolsapilotstudy AT teitelbaumausting comparativeevaluationofthestabilityoftwodifferentdentalimplantdesignsandsurgicalprotocolsapilotstudy AT billiotsusan comparativeevaluationofthestabilityoftwodifferentdentalimplantdesignsandsurgicalprotocolsapilotstudy AT popatlomeshj comparativeevaluationofthestabilityoftwodifferentdentalimplantdesignsandsurgicalprotocolsapilotstudy AT palaiologouaarchontia comparativeevaluationofthestabilityoftwodifferentdentalimplantdesignsandsurgicalprotocolsapilotstudy |