Literature DB >> 20556253

Influence of microgap location and configuration on peri-implant bone morphology in nonsubmerged implants: an experimental study in dogs.

Dietmar Weng1, Maria José Hitomi Nagata, Matthias Bell, Luiz Gustavo Nascimento de Melo, Alvaro Francisco Bosco.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: It is unknown whether different microgap configurations can cause different peri-implant bone reactions. Therefore, this study sought to compare the peri-implant bone morphologies of two implant systems with different implant-abutment connections.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three months after mandibular tooth extractions in six mongrel dogs, two oxidized screw implants with an external-hex connection were inserted (hexed group) on one side, whereas on the contralateral side two grit-blasted screw implants with an internal Morse-taper connection (Morse group) were placed. On each side, one implant was inserted level with the bone (equicrestal) and the second implant was inserted 1.5 mm below the bony crest (subcrestal). Healing abutments were inserted immediately after implant placement. Three months later, the peri-implant bone levels, the first bone-to-implant contact points, and the width and steepness of the peri-implant bone defects were evaluated histometrically.
RESULTS: All 24 implants osseointegrated clinically and histologically. No statistically significant differences between the hexed group and Morse group were detected for either the vertical position for peri-implant bone levels (Morse equicrestal -0.16 mm, hexed equicrestal -0.22 mm, Morse subcrestal 1.50 mm, hexed subcrestal 0.94 mm) or for the first bone-to-implant contact points (Morse equicrestal -2.08 mm, hexed equicrestal -0.98 mm, Morse subcrestal -1.26 mm, hexed subcrestal -0.76 mm). For the parameters width (Morse equicrestal -0.15 mm, hexed equicrestal -0.59 mm, Morse subcrestal 0.28 mm, hexed subcrestal -0.70 mm) and steepness (Morse equicrestal 25.27 degree, hexed equicrestal 57.21 degree, Morse subcrestal 15.35 degree, hexed subcrestal 37.97 degree) of the peri-implant defect, highly significant differences were noted between the Morse group and the hexed group.
CONCLUSION: Within the limits of this experiment, it can be concluded that different microgap configurations influence the size and shape of the peri-implant bone defect in nonsubmerged implants placed both at the crest and subcrestally.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20556253

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants        ISSN: 0882-2786            Impact factor:   2.804


  8 in total

1.  Assessment of lipopolysaccharide microleakage at conical implant-abutment connections.

Authors:  Sönke Harder; Elgar Susanne Quabius; Lars Ossenkop; Matthias Kern
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2011-12-02       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  Gene expression patterns of Th2 inflammation and intercellular communication in asthmatic airways.

Authors:  David F Choy; Barmak Modrek; Alexander R Abbas; Sarah Kummerfeld; Hilary F Clark; Lawren C Wu; Grazyna Fedorowicz; Zora Modrusan; John V Fahy; Prescott G Woodruff; Joseph R Arron
Journal:  J Immunol       Date:  2010-12-27       Impact factor: 5.422

Review 3.  Influence of subcrestal implant placement compared with equicrestal position on the peri-implant hard and soft tissues around platform-switched implants: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Cristina Valles; Xavier Rodríguez-Ciurana; Marco Clementini; Mariana Baglivo; Blanca Paniagua; Jose Nart
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2018-01-08       Impact factor: 3.573

Review 4.  Is the internal connection more efficient than external connection in mechanical, biological, and esthetical point of views? A systematic review.

Authors:  Marcelo Coelho Goiato; Eduardo Piza Pellizzer; Emily Vivianne Freitas da Silva; Liliane da Rocha Bonatto; Daniela Micheline dos Santos
Journal:  Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2015-04-25

5.  Evaluation of a New Dental Implant Cervical Design in Comparison with a Conventional Design in an Experimental American Foxhound Model.

Authors:  Maria Ángeles Pérez-Albacete Martínez; Carlos Pérez-Albacete Martínez; José Eduardo Maté Sánchez De Val; María Luisa Ramos Oltra; Manuel Fernández Domínguez; Jose Luis Calvo Guirado
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2018-03-21       Impact factor: 3.623

6.  Success of Dental Implant Influenced by Abutment Types and Loading Protocol.

Authors:  Sneha Mayuri; Ahamed Ka Irfan; Ritu Raj; Amrita Sen; Rajvir Malik; Subhash Bandgar; Priyadarshini Rangari
Journal:  J Pharm Bioallied Sci       Date:  2022-07-13

Review 7.  Impact of implant-abutment connection and positioning of the machined collar/microgap on crestal bone level changes: a systematic review.

Authors:  Frank Schwarz; Andrea Hegewald; Jürgen Becker
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2013-06-18       Impact factor: 5.977

8.  Impact of crestal and subcrestal implant placement in peri-implant bone: A prospective comparative study.

Authors:  Hilario Pellicer-Chover; María Peñarrocha-Diago; David Peñarrocha-Oltra; Sonia Gomar-Vercher; Rubén Agustín-Panadero; Miguel Peñarrocha-Diago
Journal:  Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal       Date:  2016-01-01
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.