Cargando…

A randomized clinical study to compare implant stability and bone loss using early loading protocol in two implant systems with different design

AIMS: The study compared changes in implant stability and bone loss of implants with different designs using early loading at 6 weeks. SETTING AND DESIGN: In vivo-comparative study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty subjects were selected and divided randomly by sealed envelope method in Group X and Grou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ranabhatt, Rani, Singh, Kamleshwar, Siddharth, Ramashanker, Tripathi, Shuchi, Arya, Deeksha
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8061433/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33835071
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_297_20
_version_ 1783681564883812352
author Ranabhatt, Rani
Singh, Kamleshwar
Siddharth, Ramashanker
Tripathi, Shuchi
Arya, Deeksha
author_facet Ranabhatt, Rani
Singh, Kamleshwar
Siddharth, Ramashanker
Tripathi, Shuchi
Arya, Deeksha
author_sort Ranabhatt, Rani
collection PubMed
description AIMS: The study compared changes in implant stability and bone loss of implants with different designs using early loading at 6 weeks. SETTING AND DESIGN: In vivo-comparative study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty subjects were selected and divided randomly by sealed envelope method in Group X and Group A for early loading for missing single posterior tooth in mandible. Implants in Group X had flared crest module and buttress thread design, whereas implants in Group A had parallel crest module and V-shaped thread design. All subjects were evaluated by Ostell for implant stability at the interval of baseline, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. ImageJ software was used for measurement of crestal bone loss in intraoral periapical radiographs at the interval of 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Unpaired t test, repeated ANOVA, Tukey post hoc test. RESULTS: The mean bone loss values of Group X at predetermined interval were 1.51 ± 0.20 mm, 2.11 ± 0.21 mm and 2.13 ± 0.21 mm. The mean bone loss values of Group A were 1.79 ± 0.16 mm, 2.92 ± 0.23 mm and 2.95 ± 0.23 mm. The mean bone loss was statistical significant (P < 0.05) at 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months. It was highly significant in Group A at 6 months (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: It was concluded that Group X implants design showed better implant stability and less bone loss when compared to Group A implants design.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8061433
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80614332022-01-01 A randomized clinical study to compare implant stability and bone loss using early loading protocol in two implant systems with different design Ranabhatt, Rani Singh, Kamleshwar Siddharth, Ramashanker Tripathi, Shuchi Arya, Deeksha J Indian Prosthodont Soc Original Article AIMS: The study compared changes in implant stability and bone loss of implants with different designs using early loading at 6 weeks. SETTING AND DESIGN: In vivo-comparative study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty subjects were selected and divided randomly by sealed envelope method in Group X and Group A for early loading for missing single posterior tooth in mandible. Implants in Group X had flared crest module and buttress thread design, whereas implants in Group A had parallel crest module and V-shaped thread design. All subjects were evaluated by Ostell for implant stability at the interval of baseline, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. ImageJ software was used for measurement of crestal bone loss in intraoral periapical radiographs at the interval of 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Unpaired t test, repeated ANOVA, Tukey post hoc test. RESULTS: The mean bone loss values of Group X at predetermined interval were 1.51 ± 0.20 mm, 2.11 ± 0.21 mm and 2.13 ± 0.21 mm. The mean bone loss values of Group A were 1.79 ± 0.16 mm, 2.92 ± 0.23 mm and 2.95 ± 0.23 mm. The mean bone loss was statistical significant (P < 0.05) at 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months. It was highly significant in Group A at 6 months (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: It was concluded that Group X implants design showed better implant stability and less bone loss when compared to Group A implants design. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2021 2021-01-29 /pmc/articles/PMC8061433/ /pubmed/33835071 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_297_20 Text en Copyright: © 2021 The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Ranabhatt, Rani
Singh, Kamleshwar
Siddharth, Ramashanker
Tripathi, Shuchi
Arya, Deeksha
A randomized clinical study to compare implant stability and bone loss using early loading protocol in two implant systems with different design
title A randomized clinical study to compare implant stability and bone loss using early loading protocol in two implant systems with different design
title_full A randomized clinical study to compare implant stability and bone loss using early loading protocol in two implant systems with different design
title_fullStr A randomized clinical study to compare implant stability and bone loss using early loading protocol in two implant systems with different design
title_full_unstemmed A randomized clinical study to compare implant stability and bone loss using early loading protocol in two implant systems with different design
title_short A randomized clinical study to compare implant stability and bone loss using early loading protocol in two implant systems with different design
title_sort randomized clinical study to compare implant stability and bone loss using early loading protocol in two implant systems with different design
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8061433/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33835071
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_297_20
work_keys_str_mv AT ranabhattrani arandomizedclinicalstudytocompareimplantstabilityandbonelossusingearlyloadingprotocolintwoimplantsystemswithdifferentdesign
AT singhkamleshwar arandomizedclinicalstudytocompareimplantstabilityandbonelossusingearlyloadingprotocolintwoimplantsystemswithdifferentdesign
AT siddharthramashanker arandomizedclinicalstudytocompareimplantstabilityandbonelossusingearlyloadingprotocolintwoimplantsystemswithdifferentdesign
AT tripathishuchi arandomizedclinicalstudytocompareimplantstabilityandbonelossusingearlyloadingprotocolintwoimplantsystemswithdifferentdesign
AT aryadeeksha arandomizedclinicalstudytocompareimplantstabilityandbonelossusingearlyloadingprotocolintwoimplantsystemswithdifferentdesign
AT ranabhattrani randomizedclinicalstudytocompareimplantstabilityandbonelossusingearlyloadingprotocolintwoimplantsystemswithdifferentdesign
AT singhkamleshwar randomizedclinicalstudytocompareimplantstabilityandbonelossusingearlyloadingprotocolintwoimplantsystemswithdifferentdesign
AT siddharthramashanker randomizedclinicalstudytocompareimplantstabilityandbonelossusingearlyloadingprotocolintwoimplantsystemswithdifferentdesign
AT tripathishuchi randomizedclinicalstudytocompareimplantstabilityandbonelossusingearlyloadingprotocolintwoimplantsystemswithdifferentdesign
AT aryadeeksha randomizedclinicalstudytocompareimplantstabilityandbonelossusingearlyloadingprotocolintwoimplantsystemswithdifferentdesign