Marginal Bone Level Evaluation after Functional Loading Around Two Different Dental Implant Designs

Ko Ning Ho, Eisner Salamanca, Hsi Kuai Lin, Sheng Yang Lee, Wei Jen Chang

研究成果: 雜誌貢獻文章

4 引文 (Scopus)

摘要

Purpose. To investigate peri-implant alveolar bone changes using periapical radiographs before and after prosthetic delivery in submerged and nonsubmerged dental implants. Methods. Digital periapical films of 60 ITI Straumann nonsubmerged dental implants and 60 Xive Dentsply submerged dental implants were taken before, immediately after, and 12 and 24 weeks after the prosthetic restoration was delivered. Results. The 60-nonsubmerged dental implant group showed mean marginal bone resorption at baseline of 0.10 ± 0.23 mm and 24 weeks later, marginal bone resorption was 0.16 ± 0.25 mm. The submerged dental implant group showed a significantly higher distal marginal bone resorption over the mesial side. Mean marginal bone resorption at baseline was 0.16 ± 0.32 on the mesial and 0.41 ± 0.56 on the distal side. Twenty-four weeks later, it was 0.69 ± 0.69 mm on the mesial and 0.99 ± 0.90 mm on the distal side. Conclusion. First, it was possible to determine that submerged implants had a higher mean marginal bone resorption and less bone-to-implant contact than nonsubmerged implants. And second, the distal side of submerged dental implants presented higher marginal bone loss than the mesial side.
原文英語
文章編號1472090
期刊BioMed Research International
2016
DOIs
出版狀態已發佈 - 2016

指紋

Dental prostheses
Dental Implants
Bone Resorption
Bone
Bone and Bones
Prosthetics
Restoration

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Immunology and Microbiology(all)
  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)

引用此文

@article{63f830aeda9c4db789565a1ab183d58f,
title = "Marginal Bone Level Evaluation after Functional Loading Around Two Different Dental Implant Designs",
abstract = "Purpose. To investigate peri-implant alveolar bone changes using periapical radiographs before and after prosthetic delivery in submerged and nonsubmerged dental implants. Methods. Digital periapical films of 60 ITI Straumann nonsubmerged dental implants and 60 Xive Dentsply submerged dental implants were taken before, immediately after, and 12 and 24 weeks after the prosthetic restoration was delivered. Results. The 60-nonsubmerged dental implant group showed mean marginal bone resorption at baseline of 0.10 ± 0.23 mm and 24 weeks later, marginal bone resorption was 0.16 ± 0.25 mm. The submerged dental implant group showed a significantly higher distal marginal bone resorption over the mesial side. Mean marginal bone resorption at baseline was 0.16 ± 0.32 on the mesial and 0.41 ± 0.56 on the distal side. Twenty-four weeks later, it was 0.69 ± 0.69 mm on the mesial and 0.99 ± 0.90 mm on the distal side. Conclusion. First, it was possible to determine that submerged implants had a higher mean marginal bone resorption and less bone-to-implant contact than nonsubmerged implants. And second, the distal side of submerged dental implants presented higher marginal bone loss than the mesial side.",
author = "Ho, {Ko Ning} and Eisner Salamanca and Lin, {Hsi Kuai} and Lee, {Sheng Yang} and Chang, {Wei Jen}",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1155/2016/1472090",
language = "English",
volume = "2016",
journal = "BioMed Research International",
issn = "2314-6133",
publisher = "Hindawi Publishing Corporation",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Marginal Bone Level Evaluation after Functional Loading Around Two Different Dental Implant Designs

AU - Ho, Ko Ning

AU - Salamanca, Eisner

AU - Lin, Hsi Kuai

AU - Lee, Sheng Yang

AU - Chang, Wei Jen

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - Purpose. To investigate peri-implant alveolar bone changes using periapical radiographs before and after prosthetic delivery in submerged and nonsubmerged dental implants. Methods. Digital periapical films of 60 ITI Straumann nonsubmerged dental implants and 60 Xive Dentsply submerged dental implants were taken before, immediately after, and 12 and 24 weeks after the prosthetic restoration was delivered. Results. The 60-nonsubmerged dental implant group showed mean marginal bone resorption at baseline of 0.10 ± 0.23 mm and 24 weeks later, marginal bone resorption was 0.16 ± 0.25 mm. The submerged dental implant group showed a significantly higher distal marginal bone resorption over the mesial side. Mean marginal bone resorption at baseline was 0.16 ± 0.32 on the mesial and 0.41 ± 0.56 on the distal side. Twenty-four weeks later, it was 0.69 ± 0.69 mm on the mesial and 0.99 ± 0.90 mm on the distal side. Conclusion. First, it was possible to determine that submerged implants had a higher mean marginal bone resorption and less bone-to-implant contact than nonsubmerged implants. And second, the distal side of submerged dental implants presented higher marginal bone loss than the mesial side.

AB - Purpose. To investigate peri-implant alveolar bone changes using periapical radiographs before and after prosthetic delivery in submerged and nonsubmerged dental implants. Methods. Digital periapical films of 60 ITI Straumann nonsubmerged dental implants and 60 Xive Dentsply submerged dental implants were taken before, immediately after, and 12 and 24 weeks after the prosthetic restoration was delivered. Results. The 60-nonsubmerged dental implant group showed mean marginal bone resorption at baseline of 0.10 ± 0.23 mm and 24 weeks later, marginal bone resorption was 0.16 ± 0.25 mm. The submerged dental implant group showed a significantly higher distal marginal bone resorption over the mesial side. Mean marginal bone resorption at baseline was 0.16 ± 0.32 on the mesial and 0.41 ± 0.56 on the distal side. Twenty-four weeks later, it was 0.69 ± 0.69 mm on the mesial and 0.99 ± 0.90 mm on the distal side. Conclusion. First, it was possible to determine that submerged implants had a higher mean marginal bone resorption and less bone-to-implant contact than nonsubmerged implants. And second, the distal side of submerged dental implants presented higher marginal bone loss than the mesial side.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85003881412&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85003881412&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1155/2016/1472090

DO - 10.1155/2016/1472090

M3 - Article

C2 - 27999789

AN - SCOPUS:85003881412

VL - 2016

JO - BioMed Research International

JF - BioMed Research International

SN - 2314-6133

M1 - 1472090

ER -