Literature DB >> 20874829

A split-mouth comparative study up to 16 years of two screw-shaped titanium implant systems.

Reinhilde Jacobs1, Pisha Pittayapat, Daniel van Steenberghe, Greet De Mars, Frieda Gijbels, Annelies Van Der Donck, Limin Li, Xin Liang, Nele Van Assche, Marc Quirynen, Ignace Naert.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Many studies have dealt with the clinical outcome of oral implants, yet none applied a randomized split-mouth design for a long-term follow-up of similar implant systems. AIM: To evaluate two oral implant systems with different surface characteristics in a randomized split-mouth design and to radiologically analyse peri-implant bone level and density over an up to 16-year period.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study comprised clinical and radiographic records of 18 partially edentulous patients treated with both implant types randomly placed in either left or right jaw sides. Outcome was evaluated over time.
RESULTS: Clinical and radiographic parameters showed no significant differences over time for both systems. Ten years after implant placement, a significantly increasing peri-implant bone density was noted, while Periotest values were found to be significantly decreasing. Fifteen years after implant loading, mean bone loss was 0.02 mm (range -1.15 to 1.51; SD 0.45) for Astra Tech® implants (n=24) and 0.31 mm (range -0.98 to 2.31; SD 0.69) for Brånemark® implants (n=23).
CONCLUSIONS: The study failed to demonstrate significant differences in the outcome of the peri-implant bone for two implant systems with different surface characteristics. The marginal bone level around oral implants changed <0.5 mm after 15 years of loading.
© 2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20874829     DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2010.01626.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Periodontol        ISSN: 0303-6979            Impact factor:   8.728


  6 in total

1.  Peri-implant bone changes following tooth extraction, immediate placement and loading of implants in the edentulous maxilla.

Authors:  Lieven Barbier; Johan Abeloos; Calix De Clercq; Reinhilde Jacobs
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2011-09-20       Impact factor: 3.573

Review 2.  WITHDRAWN: Interventions for replacing missing teeth: different types of dental implants.

Authors:  Marco Esposito; Yasmin Ardebili; Helen V Worthington
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-10-10

Review 3.  To what extent residual alveolar ridge can be preserved by implant? A systematic review.

Authors:  Ahmed Khalifa Khalifa; Masahiro Wada; Kazunori Ikebe; Yoshinobu Maeda
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2016-11-23

Review 4.  Prevalence of Peri-Implantitis in Implants with Turned and Rough Surfaces: a Systematic Review.

Authors:  Nikola Saulacic; Benoit Schaller
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Res       Date:  2019-03-31

Review 5.  Implications of considering peri-implant bone loss a disease, a narrative review.

Authors:  Tomas Albrektsson; Pentti Tengvall; Luis Amengual-Peñafiel; Pierluigi Coli; Georgios Kotsakis; David L Cochran
Journal:  Clin Implant Dent Relat Res       Date:  2022-05-31       Impact factor: 4.259

6.  Sandblasting reduces dental implant failure rate but not marginal bone level loss: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  László Márk Czumbel; Beáta Kerémi; Noémi Gede; Alexandra Mikó; Barbara Tóth; Dezső Csupor; Andrea Szabó; Sándor Farkasdi; Gábor Gerber; Márta Balaskó; Erika Pétervári; Róbert Sepp; Péter Hegyi; Gábor Varga
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-05-03       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.