Cargando…

Comparison of the Marginal Bone Loss in One-stage versus Two-stage Implant Surgery

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM: Dental implant is one of the best choices for reconstruction of aesthetic and function. High success rate of these treatments are related to some considerations such as case selection, implant system selection and surgical methods. One-stage or two-stage surgical approaches...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gheisari, Rasoul, Eatemadi, Hesamuddin, Alavian, Akram
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Journal of Dentistry Shiraz University of Medical Sciences 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5702431/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29201970
_version_ 1783281529182486528
author Gheisari, Rasoul
Eatemadi, Hesamuddin
Alavian, Akram
author_facet Gheisari, Rasoul
Eatemadi, Hesamuddin
Alavian, Akram
author_sort Gheisari, Rasoul
collection PubMed
description STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM: Dental implant is one of the best choices for reconstruction of aesthetic and function. High success rate of these treatments are related to some considerations such as case selection, implant system selection and surgical methods. One-stage or two-stage surgical approaches are routine surgical methods in dental implant treatments. The minimum rate of bone loss around fixtures is the most important criteria for evaluation of implant treatment success that can be affected by different methods of surgery. PURPOSE: This experimental study has been done to compare the crestal bone loss at mesial and distal surface of implants installed through either one-stage or two-stage surgical approach. MATERIALS AND METHOD: In the present randomized clinical trial, 310 Astra Tech implant system were divided into two unequal groups to be used for 140 patients. One hundred and seventy implants were inserted through one-stage and 140 through two-stage surgical approach. The baseline parallel periapical radiography was provided immediately after the surgery. Six months after the functional loading, another radiographic image was provided by using the same technique and machine. Marginal bone loss was calculated by using Adobe Photoshop CS5 software. Data were statistically analyzed with SPSS software. p values less than 0.05 were considered as significant. RESULTS: The mean Bone loss on the mesial and distal surfaces of implants inserted through one-stage surgery and two-stage surgery was 0.76±0.04 and 0.842±0.04 mm respectively. No notable marginal bone change was observed between the maxilla (0.860mm) and mandible (0.729mm). Moreover, p Value was>0.05 in all samples, indicating no significant difference in the crestal bone loss. CONCLUSION: Accordingly, one-stage surgical technique may provide better esthetic and function for dental implants. There is no significant difference between the two approaches concerning the marginal bone loss.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5702431
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Journal of Dentistry Shiraz University of Medical Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57024312017-12-01 Comparison of the Marginal Bone Loss in One-stage versus Two-stage Implant Surgery Gheisari, Rasoul Eatemadi, Hesamuddin Alavian, Akram J Dent (Shiraz) Original Article STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM: Dental implant is one of the best choices for reconstruction of aesthetic and function. High success rate of these treatments are related to some considerations such as case selection, implant system selection and surgical methods. One-stage or two-stage surgical approaches are routine surgical methods in dental implant treatments. The minimum rate of bone loss around fixtures is the most important criteria for evaluation of implant treatment success that can be affected by different methods of surgery. PURPOSE: This experimental study has been done to compare the crestal bone loss at mesial and distal surface of implants installed through either one-stage or two-stage surgical approach. MATERIALS AND METHOD: In the present randomized clinical trial, 310 Astra Tech implant system were divided into two unequal groups to be used for 140 patients. One hundred and seventy implants were inserted through one-stage and 140 through two-stage surgical approach. The baseline parallel periapical radiography was provided immediately after the surgery. Six months after the functional loading, another radiographic image was provided by using the same technique and machine. Marginal bone loss was calculated by using Adobe Photoshop CS5 software. Data were statistically analyzed with SPSS software. p values less than 0.05 were considered as significant. RESULTS: The mean Bone loss on the mesial and distal surfaces of implants inserted through one-stage surgery and two-stage surgery was 0.76±0.04 and 0.842±0.04 mm respectively. No notable marginal bone change was observed between the maxilla (0.860mm) and mandible (0.729mm). Moreover, p Value was>0.05 in all samples, indicating no significant difference in the crestal bone loss. CONCLUSION: Accordingly, one-stage surgical technique may provide better esthetic and function for dental implants. There is no significant difference between the two approaches concerning the marginal bone loss. Journal of Dentistry Shiraz University of Medical Sciences 2017-12 /pmc/articles/PMC5702431/ /pubmed/29201970 Text en Copyright: © Journal of Dentistry Shiraz University of Medical Sciences http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Gheisari, Rasoul
Eatemadi, Hesamuddin
Alavian, Akram
Comparison of the Marginal Bone Loss in One-stage versus Two-stage Implant Surgery
title Comparison of the Marginal Bone Loss in One-stage versus Two-stage Implant Surgery
title_full Comparison of the Marginal Bone Loss in One-stage versus Two-stage Implant Surgery
title_fullStr Comparison of the Marginal Bone Loss in One-stage versus Two-stage Implant Surgery
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the Marginal Bone Loss in One-stage versus Two-stage Implant Surgery
title_short Comparison of the Marginal Bone Loss in One-stage versus Two-stage Implant Surgery
title_sort comparison of the marginal bone loss in one-stage versus two-stage implant surgery
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5702431/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29201970
work_keys_str_mv AT gheisarirasoul comparisonofthemarginalbonelossinonestageversustwostageimplantsurgery
AT eatemadihesamuddin comparisonofthemarginalbonelossinonestageversustwostageimplantsurgery
AT alavianakram comparisonofthemarginalbonelossinonestageversustwostageimplantsurgery