Literature DB >> 16799754

Comparative study of axial and femoral bone mineral density and parameters of mandibular bone quality in patients receiving dental implants.

M A L Amorim1, L Takayama, V Jorgetti, R M R Pereira.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: In view of the increase in the life expectancy of humans and in edentulism of the population above 50 years of age, in which the prevalence of osteoporosis is also higher, it is fundamental to better understand the effects of systemic bone mass loss on the healing process of dental implants and to determine the quality of the bone that surrounds them. The objective of the present study was to compare systemic osteoporosis (axial and femoral) and parameters of mandibular bone quality, and to evaluate osseointegration in postmenopausal women receiving dental implants.
METHODS: The sample consisted of 39 women aged 48-70 years, 19 with a densitometric diagnosis of osteoporosis in the lumbar spine and femoral neck and 20 controls with a normal densitometric diagnosis. Bone mineral density was measured in the patients and controls by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Eighty-two osseointegrated dental implants were placed in the mandible, 39 of them in the osteoporosis group and 43 in the control group. Mandibular bone quality was evaluated by classifying mandibular inferior cortical and trabecular bone on panoramic radiographs and by histomorphometric analysis of a mandibular bone biopsy. Osseointegration was analyzed after 9 months.
RESULTS: No significant difference was observed between patients with osteoporosis and controls when comparing individuals with a normal cortex and those with a severely or moderately eroded cortex determined on panoramic radiographs. Histomorphometric analysis also revealed no difference in the parameters of bone formation or resorption between the two groups. Implant failure was observed in only one case.
CONCLUSION: We conclude that there is no association between systemic osteoporosis (axial and femur) and parameters of poor mandibular bone quality. The loss of one implant (1.2%) is compatible with the literature and cannot be attributed to systemic osteoporosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16799754     DOI: 10.1007/s00198-006-0131-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Osteoporos Int        ISSN: 0937-941X            Impact factor:   4.507


  35 in total

1.  Brånemark implants and osteoporosis: a clinical exploratory study.

Authors:  B Friberg; A Ekestubbe; D Mellström; L Sennerby
Journal:  Clin Implant Dent Relat Res       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 3.932

2.  Relationships between mandibular and skeletal bone in a population of normal women.

Authors:  P J Kribbs; C H Chesnut; S M Ott; R F Kilcoyne
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  1990-01       Impact factor: 3.426

3.  Morphology of the mandibular cortex on panoramic radiographs as an indicator of bone quality.

Authors:  E Klemetti; S Kolmakow
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 2.419

4.  Oral signs as indicators of possible osteoporosis in elderly women.

Authors:  A Taguchi; K Tanimoto; Y Suei; K Otani; T Wada
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod       Date:  1995-11

5.  Pantomography in assessment of the osteoporosis risk group.

Authors:  E Klemetti; S Kolmakov; H Kröger
Journal:  Scand J Dent Res       Date:  1994-02

6.  Static histomorphometry of human iliac crest and vertebral trabecular bone: a comparative study.

Authors:  J S Thomsen; E N Ebbesen; Li Mosekilde
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 4.398

7.  Relationships between mandibular and skeletal bone in an osteoporotic population.

Authors:  P J Kribbs; C H Chesnut; S M Ott; R F Kilcoyne
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  1989-12       Impact factor: 3.426

8.  Osseointegration of dental implants in rabbit bone with low mineral density.

Authors:  H Mori; M Manabe; Y Kurachi; M Nagumo
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 1.895

9.  Osteoporosis: a risk factor in periodontal disease.

Authors:  N von Wowern; B Klausen; G Kollerup
Journal:  J Periodontol       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 6.993

10.  Examination of the bone-implant interface in experimentally induced osteoporotic bone.

Authors:  Peter Cho; G B Schneider; Kenneth Krizan; J C Keller
Journal:  Implant Dent       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 2.454

View more
  6 in total

1.  Bone mineral density and mandibular bone quality in patients receiving dental implants.

Authors:  A Taguchi
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Bone mineral density and mandibular bone quality in patients receiving dental implants: reply to Dr. Taguchi.

Authors:  M A L Amorim
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Template-guided vs. non-guided drilling in site preparation of dental implants.

Authors:  Uta Scherer; Marcus Stoetzer; Martin Ruecker; Nils-Claudius Gellrich; Constantin von See
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2014-10-30       Impact factor: 3.573

4.  Comparison of antegonial index, mental index, panoramic mandibular index and mandibular cortical index values in the panoramic radiographs of normal males and male patients with osteoporosis.

Authors:  S Dagistan; O M Bilge
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 2.419

5.  Influence of estrogen deficiency on bone around osseointegrated dental implants: an experimental study in the rat jaw model.

Authors:  Gabriela Giro; Paulo G Coelho; Roberto Sales-Pessoa; Rosa Maria Rodrigues Pereira; Toshihisa Kawai; Silvana Regina Perez Orrico
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2011-04-29       Impact factor: 1.895

6.  IDIOS: An innovative index for evaluating dental imaging-based osteoporosis screening indices.

Authors:  Imad Barngkgei; Esam Halboub; Abeer Abdulkareem Almashraqi; Razan Khattab; Iyad Al Haffar
Journal:  Imaging Sci Dent       Date:  2016-09-20
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.