Cargando…
Does Implant-Abutment Interface affect Marginal Bone Levels around Implants?
Objective The use of dental implants with different types of surface roughness and implant-abutment interface has brought about a situation of marginal bone loss. Therefore, the aim of this study was to analyze and compare marginal bone levels of different types of osseointegrated dental implants wi...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd.
2019
|
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6635972/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31170755 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0039-1688538 |
_version_ | 1783435978183016448 |
---|---|
author | Elemek, Eser Urgancioglu, Artun Dincer, Janberd Cilingir, Altug |
author_facet | Elemek, Eser Urgancioglu, Artun Dincer, Janberd Cilingir, Altug |
author_sort | Elemek, Eser |
collection | PubMed |
description | Objective The use of dental implants with different types of surface roughness and implant-abutment interface has brought about a situation of marginal bone loss. Therefore, the aim of this study was to analyze and compare marginal bone levels of different types of osseointegrated dental implants with platform switch (Group A: Ankylos, Mannheim, Germany) and platform match (Group B: Dentsply Xive, Mannheim, Germany, and Group C: MIS Implant Technologies, Karmiel, Israel). Materials and Methods One hundred and seven patients (52 men and 55 women) with a mean age of 54.79 (standard deviation ± 12.35) years and a total of 321 dental implants (Group A, n = 198; Group B, n = 58; and Group C, n = 65) placed in a private practice between April 2006 and May 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. In addition to demographic information and implant characteristics, marginal bone levels were evaluated by Image J (Wayne Rasband, National Institute of Health, Maryland) program. Results The mean age of all patients was 54.79 ± 12.35 years, and 51.5% of them were women. Implants supporting fixed bridge were most commonly used in all groups (65%), whereas only 20% were restored with a single crown and 15% with overdentures. In total, 47.5% of all implants showed no marginal bone loss. Mean bone loss in Group A was significantly lower (0.81 ± 1.60 mm) as compared to Group B (1.58 ± 1.59 mm) and Group C (1.18 ± 1.36) ( p < 0.005). Conclusion Among different types of dental implants, platform switch seems to preserve marginal bone levels and increase the long-term success of dental implants. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6635972 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-66359722019-07-18 Does Implant-Abutment Interface affect Marginal Bone Levels around Implants? Elemek, Eser Urgancioglu, Artun Dincer, Janberd Cilingir, Altug Eur J Dent Objective The use of dental implants with different types of surface roughness and implant-abutment interface has brought about a situation of marginal bone loss. Therefore, the aim of this study was to analyze and compare marginal bone levels of different types of osseointegrated dental implants with platform switch (Group A: Ankylos, Mannheim, Germany) and platform match (Group B: Dentsply Xive, Mannheim, Germany, and Group C: MIS Implant Technologies, Karmiel, Israel). Materials and Methods One hundred and seven patients (52 men and 55 women) with a mean age of 54.79 (standard deviation ± 12.35) years and a total of 321 dental implants (Group A, n = 198; Group B, n = 58; and Group C, n = 65) placed in a private practice between April 2006 and May 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. In addition to demographic information and implant characteristics, marginal bone levels were evaluated by Image J (Wayne Rasband, National Institute of Health, Maryland) program. Results The mean age of all patients was 54.79 ± 12.35 years, and 51.5% of them were women. Implants supporting fixed bridge were most commonly used in all groups (65%), whereas only 20% were restored with a single crown and 15% with overdentures. In total, 47.5% of all implants showed no marginal bone loss. Mean bone loss in Group A was significantly lower (0.81 ± 1.60 mm) as compared to Group B (1.58 ± 1.59 mm) and Group C (1.18 ± 1.36) ( p < 0.005). Conclusion Among different types of dental implants, platform switch seems to preserve marginal bone levels and increase the long-term success of dental implants. Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd. 2019-02 2019-06-06 /pmc/articles/PMC6635972/ /pubmed/31170755 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0039-1688538 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Elemek, Eser Urgancioglu, Artun Dincer, Janberd Cilingir, Altug Does Implant-Abutment Interface affect Marginal Bone Levels around Implants? |
title | Does Implant-Abutment Interface affect Marginal Bone Levels around Implants? |
title_full | Does Implant-Abutment Interface affect Marginal Bone Levels around Implants? |
title_fullStr | Does Implant-Abutment Interface affect Marginal Bone Levels around Implants? |
title_full_unstemmed | Does Implant-Abutment Interface affect Marginal Bone Levels around Implants? |
title_short | Does Implant-Abutment Interface affect Marginal Bone Levels around Implants? |
title_sort | does implant-abutment interface affect marginal bone levels around implants? |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6635972/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31170755 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0039-1688538 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT elemekeser doesimplantabutmentinterfaceaffectmarginalbonelevelsaroundimplants AT urganciogluartun doesimplantabutmentinterfaceaffectmarginalbonelevelsaroundimplants AT dincerjanberd doesimplantabutmentinterfaceaffectmarginalbonelevelsaroundimplants AT cilingiraltug doesimplantabutmentinterfaceaffectmarginalbonelevelsaroundimplants |