Radiological implications of crestal and subcrestal implant placement in posterior areas. A cone-beam computed tomography study

BACKGROUND: Subcrestal implant placement has been suggested as a method that could contribute to maintain the periimplant soft and hard tissues in comparison with crestal placement. The objective of this study was to investigate the relationship between implant placement at different depths in the alveolar bone and (a) the thickness of the buccal bone plate (BBP); and (b) crestal cortical bone thickness, based on the use of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed, analyzing CBCT scans from the database of the Oral Surgery Unit of the University of Valencia. Individuals with single missing teeth in posterior sectors were included. Two trained dentists used a software application to plan implant placement at four different depths from the bone crest (from 0-2 mm subcrestal). The thickness of the BBP was measured at each established depth, tracing a line from the implant platform to the outermost part of the facial alveolar bone, and the ratio between the implant platform and cortical bone thickness was calculated. RESULTS: The study sample consisted of 64 patients. In the case of implants placed in a crestal position, the distance from the platform to the BBP was 1.99±1.10 mm. This distance increased significantly (p<0.001) with the planned implant placement depth, reaching an average of 2.90±1.22 mm when placement was 2 mm subcrestal. Subcrestal implant placement at this depth implied surpassing the cortical bone in 91% of the cases. CONCLUSIONS: Radiological planning of implant placement in a subcrestal position results in a greater distance from the implant platform to the BBP. In general terms, planning implant placement at a depth of 2 mm subcrestal surpassed the cortical bone in 91% of the cases. Key words:Subcrestal implant, cortical bone thickness, buccal bone plate, cone-beam computed tomography.