Cargando…

Comparison of 6‐mm and 11‐mm dental implants in the posterior region supporting fixed dental prostheses: 5‐year results of an open multicenter randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this multicenter, randomized controlled trial was to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of 6‐mm or 11‐mm implants, placed in the posterior maxilla and mandible, during a 5‐year follow‐up period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety‐five patients with adequate bone height f...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Guljé, Felix L., Meijer, Henny J. A., Abrahamsson, Ingemar, Barwacz, Christopher A., Chen, Stephen, Palmer, Paul J., Zadeh, Homayoun, Stanford, Clark M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7821315/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33025645
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.13674
_version_ 1783639397120344064
author Guljé, Felix L.
Meijer, Henny J. A.
Abrahamsson, Ingemar
Barwacz, Christopher A.
Chen, Stephen
Palmer, Paul J.
Zadeh, Homayoun
Stanford, Clark M.
author_facet Guljé, Felix L.
Meijer, Henny J. A.
Abrahamsson, Ingemar
Barwacz, Christopher A.
Chen, Stephen
Palmer, Paul J.
Zadeh, Homayoun
Stanford, Clark M.
author_sort Guljé, Felix L.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The aim of this multicenter, randomized controlled trial was to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of 6‐mm or 11‐mm implants, placed in the posterior maxilla and mandible, during a 5‐year follow‐up period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety‐five patients with adequate bone height for 11‐mm implants, were randomly allocated to a 6‐mm group (test group with short implants) or an 11‐mm group (control group with standard‐length implants). Two or three implants of the same length were placed in each patient and after 6 weeks loaded with a splinted provisional restoration. This was followed by definitive splinted restoration 6 months after implant placement. Clinical and radiographic parameters, including the occurrence of complications were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 49 patients were enrolled to receive 6‐mm implants (n = 108) and 46 patients to receive 11‐mm implants (n = 101). Three implants (two of 6 mm and one of 11 mm in length) were lost before loading and one 6‐mm implant after 15 months of function, and one 11‐mm implant was lost during the first year of function. The 5‐year survival rates were 96.0% and 98.9% in the 6‐mm and 11‐mm group, respectively. The mean marginal bone level changes 5 years post‐loading were 0.01 ± 0.45 mm (bone gain) in the 6‐mm group and −0.12 ± 0.93 mm (bone loss) in the 11‐mm group (p = .7670). Clinical parameters, including plaque, bleeding on probing and pocket probing depth were not significantly different between the groups, and also technical complications were low. CONCLUSION: The clinical and radiographic outcomes of 6‐mm short and 11‐mm standard‐length implants were not different during a 5‐year evaluation period.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7821315
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78213152021-01-29 Comparison of 6‐mm and 11‐mm dental implants in the posterior region supporting fixed dental prostheses: 5‐year results of an open multicenter randomized controlled trial Guljé, Felix L. Meijer, Henny J. A. Abrahamsson, Ingemar Barwacz, Christopher A. Chen, Stephen Palmer, Paul J. Zadeh, Homayoun Stanford, Clark M. Clin Oral Implants Res Original Research OBJECTIVE: The aim of this multicenter, randomized controlled trial was to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of 6‐mm or 11‐mm implants, placed in the posterior maxilla and mandible, during a 5‐year follow‐up period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety‐five patients with adequate bone height for 11‐mm implants, were randomly allocated to a 6‐mm group (test group with short implants) or an 11‐mm group (control group with standard‐length implants). Two or three implants of the same length were placed in each patient and after 6 weeks loaded with a splinted provisional restoration. This was followed by definitive splinted restoration 6 months after implant placement. Clinical and radiographic parameters, including the occurrence of complications were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 49 patients were enrolled to receive 6‐mm implants (n = 108) and 46 patients to receive 11‐mm implants (n = 101). Three implants (two of 6 mm and one of 11 mm in length) were lost before loading and one 6‐mm implant after 15 months of function, and one 11‐mm implant was lost during the first year of function. The 5‐year survival rates were 96.0% and 98.9% in the 6‐mm and 11‐mm group, respectively. The mean marginal bone level changes 5 years post‐loading were 0.01 ± 0.45 mm (bone gain) in the 6‐mm group and −0.12 ± 0.93 mm (bone loss) in the 11‐mm group (p = .7670). Clinical parameters, including plaque, bleeding on probing and pocket probing depth were not significantly different between the groups, and also technical complications were low. CONCLUSION: The clinical and radiographic outcomes of 6‐mm short and 11‐mm standard‐length implants were not different during a 5‐year evaluation period. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-10-23 2021-01 /pmc/articles/PMC7821315/ /pubmed/33025645 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.13674 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Clinical Oral Implants Research published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Research
Guljé, Felix L.
Meijer, Henny J. A.
Abrahamsson, Ingemar
Barwacz, Christopher A.
Chen, Stephen
Palmer, Paul J.
Zadeh, Homayoun
Stanford, Clark M.
Comparison of 6‐mm and 11‐mm dental implants in the posterior region supporting fixed dental prostheses: 5‐year results of an open multicenter randomized controlled trial
title Comparison of 6‐mm and 11‐mm dental implants in the posterior region supporting fixed dental prostheses: 5‐year results of an open multicenter randomized controlled trial
title_full Comparison of 6‐mm and 11‐mm dental implants in the posterior region supporting fixed dental prostheses: 5‐year results of an open multicenter randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Comparison of 6‐mm and 11‐mm dental implants in the posterior region supporting fixed dental prostheses: 5‐year results of an open multicenter randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of 6‐mm and 11‐mm dental implants in the posterior region supporting fixed dental prostheses: 5‐year results of an open multicenter randomized controlled trial
title_short Comparison of 6‐mm and 11‐mm dental implants in the posterior region supporting fixed dental prostheses: 5‐year results of an open multicenter randomized controlled trial
title_sort comparison of 6‐mm and 11‐mm dental implants in the posterior region supporting fixed dental prostheses: 5‐year results of an open multicenter randomized controlled trial
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7821315/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33025645
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.13674
work_keys_str_mv AT guljefelixl comparisonof6mmand11mmdentalimplantsintheposteriorregionsupportingfixeddentalprostheses5yearresultsofanopenmulticenterrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT meijerhennyja comparisonof6mmand11mmdentalimplantsintheposteriorregionsupportingfixeddentalprostheses5yearresultsofanopenmulticenterrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT abrahamssoningemar comparisonof6mmand11mmdentalimplantsintheposteriorregionsupportingfixeddentalprostheses5yearresultsofanopenmulticenterrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT barwaczchristophera comparisonof6mmand11mmdentalimplantsintheposteriorregionsupportingfixeddentalprostheses5yearresultsofanopenmulticenterrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT chenstephen comparisonof6mmand11mmdentalimplantsintheposteriorregionsupportingfixeddentalprostheses5yearresultsofanopenmulticenterrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT palmerpaulj comparisonof6mmand11mmdentalimplantsintheposteriorregionsupportingfixeddentalprostheses5yearresultsofanopenmulticenterrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT zadehhomayoun comparisonof6mmand11mmdentalimplantsintheposteriorregionsupportingfixeddentalprostheses5yearresultsofanopenmulticenterrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT stanfordclarkm comparisonof6mmand11mmdentalimplantsintheposteriorregionsupportingfixeddentalprostheses5yearresultsofanopenmulticenterrandomizedcontrolledtrial