Nils Ravald1, Simon Dahlgren, Anders Teiwik, Kerstin Gröndahl. 1. Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Centre for Oral Rehabilitation, Public Dental Service of Östergötland, Linköping, Sweden. nils.ravald@lio.se
Abstract
AIM: To study the long-term outcome of implant survival rate, soft and hard tissue conditions and prosthetic status in a group of individuals treated with either Astra Tech TiOblast or Brånemark turned implants supporting a full-arch bridge. MATERIAL AND METHODS:Edentulous patients treated with either Astra Tech TiOblast surface or Brånemark turned implants were recalled for examination after 12-15 years. Out of initially 66 patients 46 were available for examination. Intra-oral radiographs were taken for bone level assessments. Clinical prosthetic conditions, number of surviving implants, implant stability, plaque scores, probing pocket depths, bleeding and pus after probing were recorded. Analyses of bone level changes during the total observation period were performed. RESULTS: Three patients in the Astra Tech group lost totally eight implants and five patients in the Brånemark group lost 10 implants during the total observation period. No statistically significant difference in implant loss or bone level change was found. Sixteen per cent of Astra Tech and 29% of Brånemark patients showed at least one implant with ≥2 mm bone loss after the first year in function. The corresponding prevalence on implant level was 6% and 5% respectively. No significant differences were found between the other examined variables. Two patients showed prosthetic complications of the supra construction in need of repair. Seven bridges had minor ceramic chippings. CONCLUSION: Treatment with Astra Tech TiOblast implants and Brånemark turned implants supporting full-arch bridges showed generally good clinical results with low numbers of implants with marginal bone loss indicative of peri-implantitis. No significant differences were found between the implant systems after 12-15 years in function.
RCT Entities:
AIM: To study the long-term outcome of implant survival rate, soft and hard tissue conditions and prosthetic status in a group of individuals treated with either Astra Tech TiOblast or Brånemark turned implants supporting a full-arch bridge. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Edentulous patients treated with either Astra Tech TiOblast surface or Brånemark turned implants were recalled for examination after 12-15 years. Out of initially 66 patients 46 were available for examination. Intra-oral radiographs were taken for bone level assessments. Clinical prosthetic conditions, number of surviving implants, implant stability, plaque scores, probing pocket depths, bleeding and pus after probing were recorded. Analyses of bone level changes during the total observation period were performed. RESULTS: Three patients in the Astra Tech group lost totally eight implants and five patients in the Brånemark group lost 10 implants during the total observation period. No statistically significant difference in implant loss or bone level change was found. Sixteen per cent of Astra Tech and 29% of Brånemark patients showed at least one implant with ≥2 mm bone loss after the first year in function. The corresponding prevalence on implant level was 6% and 5% respectively. No significant differences were found between the other examined variables. Two patients showed prosthetic complications of the supra construction in need of repair. Seven bridges had minor ceramic chippings. CONCLUSION: Treatment with Astra Tech TiOblast implants and Brånemark turned implants supporting full-arch bridges showed generally good clinical results with low numbers of implants with marginal bone loss indicative of peri-implantitis. No significant differences were found between the implant systems after 12-15 years in function.
Authors: Pedro Diaz; Esther Gonzalo; Luis J Gil Villagra; Barbara Miegimolle; Maria J Suarez Journal: BMC Oral Health Date: 2022-10-19 Impact factor: 3.747