Literature DB >> 11168188

Biologic width around titanium implants. A physiologically formed and stable dimension over time.

J S Hermann1, D Buser, R K Schenk, F L Higginbottom, D L Cochran.   

Abstract

Research in implant dentistry has mainly focused on hard tissue integration with much less data available with regards to soft tissue integration involving epithelium and connective tissue. In the present study, the implantogingival junction of unloaded and loaded non-submerged titanium implants has been analyzed histometrically in the canine mandible. In 6 foxhounds, 69 implants were placed. Dogs in the unloaded group were sacrificed 3 months after implant placement. Loaded implants were restored with gold crowns and those dogs were sacrificed after 3 months and 12 months of loading. Non-decalcified histologic sections were analyzed histometrically measuring the dimensions of the Sulcus Depth (SD), the Junctional Epithelium (JE), and the Connective Tissue Contact (CTC). Histometric evaluation revealed that significant changes within tissue compartments (SD, JE, CTC) occurred over time (P < 0.05). Sulcus Depth had a mean of 0.49 mm and 0.50 mm after 3 months and 6 months of healing, but after 15 months was 0.16 mm which was significantly different. Similarly, the length of the Junctional Epithelium after 3 months and 6 months of healing was 1.16 mm and 1.44 mm, respectively, and these values were significantly different from measurements taken after 15 months (1.88 mm). The area of Connective Tissue Contact showed a different pattern of change in that after 3 months of healing (1.36 mm) it was significantly different from the same area after 6 months and 15 months which were 1.01 mm and 1.05 mm, respectively. Interestingly, the sum of SD, JE, and CTC, forming the Biologic Width, did not change over the observation period (P > 0.05). These data indicate that the Biologic Width is a physiologically formed and stable structure over time in the case of non-submerged, one-piece titanium implants as evaluated histometrically under unloaded and loaded conditions. Dynamic changes did occur, however, within the overall Biologic Width dimension. Thus, the use of non-submerged, one-piece implants allow for stable overall peri-implant soft tissues as evaluated under loaded conditions for up to 12 months.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11168188     DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.011001001.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res        ISSN: 0905-7161            Impact factor:   5.977


  25 in total

1.  Distance between implants has a potential impact of crestal bone resorption.

Authors:  Matteo Danza; Ilaria Zollino; Anna Avantaggiato; Alessandra Lucchese; Francesco Carinci
Journal:  Saudi Dent J       Date:  2011-02-19

2.  Resorption of labial bone in maxillary anterior implant.

Authors:  Young-Bum Cho; Seung-Jin Moon; Chae-Heon Chung; Hee-Jung Kim
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2011-06-30       Impact factor: 1.904

3.  Comparative assessment of the interfacial soft and hard tissues investing implants and natural teeth in the macaque mandible.

Authors:  Chong Huat Siar; Chooi Gait Toh; Georgios E Romanos; Kok Han Ng
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2014-11-21       Impact factor: 3.573

4.  New technique for inter-implant papilla reconstruction between two or more implants in patients with variably reabsorbed ridges and flat anatomy. Preliminary results of a 9 consecutive clinical case series.

Authors:  R Tizzoni; M Tizzoni
Journal:  Oral Implantol (Rome)       Date:  2010-11-19

5.  Effect of different localizations of microgap on clinical parameters and inflammatory cytokines in peri-implant crevicular fluid: a prospective comparative study.

Authors:  A Duygu Boynueğri; Mehmet Yalim; Seçil Karakoca Nemli; B Imge Ergüder; Pelin Gökalp
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2011-01-07       Impact factor: 3.573

6.  Immediate definitive individualized abutments reduce peri-implant bone loss: a randomized controlled split-mouth study on 16 patients.

Authors:  M Erhan Çömlekoğlu; Nejat Nizam; Mine Dündar Çömlekoğlu
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2017-05-31       Impact factor: 3.573

7.  What is the effect of initial implant position on the crestal bone level in flap and flapless technique during healing period?

Authors:  Mohammed Jasim Al-Juboori; Shaifulizan Ab Rahman; Akram Hassan; Ikmal Hisham Bin Ismail; Omar Farouq Tawfiq
Journal:  J Periodontal Implant Sci       Date:  2013-08-31       Impact factor: 2.614

8.  Retrospective Clinical Study of Marginal Bone Level Changes with Two Different Screw-Implant Types: Comparison Between Tissue Level (TE) and Bone Level (BL) Implant.

Authors:  Vinay V Kumar; Keyvan Sagheb; Peer W Kämmerer; Bilal Al-Nawas; Wilfried Wagner
Journal:  J Maxillofac Oral Surg       Date:  2013-06-11

9.  Various Surface Treatments to Implant Provisional Restorations and Their Effect on Epithelial Cell Adhesion: A Comparative In Vitro Study.

Authors:  Darya Luchinskaya; Rong Du; David M Owens; Dennis Tarnow; Nurit Bittner
Journal:  Implant Dent       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 2.454

10.  A 3-year prospective cohort study on mandibular anterior cantilever restorations associated with screw-retained implant-supported prosthesis: An in vivo study.

Authors:  Vizaikumar Vasudha Nelluri; Kandathilparambil Maria Roseme; Rajani Kumar Gedela
Journal:  J Indian Prosthodont Soc       Date:  2021 Apr-Jun
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.