Baoxin Huang1,2,3, Huanxin Meng1, Weidong Zhu1, Lukasz Witek4,5, Nick Tovar4, Paulo G Coelho4,6. 1. Department of Periodontology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Beijing, China. 2. Department of Oral Implantology, Guanghua School of Stomatology, Hospital of Stomatology, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China. 3. Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Stomatology, Guangzhou, China. 4. Department of Biomaterials and Biomimetics, New York University College of Dentistry, New York, NY, USA. 5. School of Chemical Engineering, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK, USA. 6. Department of Periodontology and Implant Dentistry, New York University College of Dentistry, New York, NY, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the influence of implant-abutment interface (IAI) placement depth on bone remodeling around implants with two different types of tapered internal IAI: screwed-in (SI) and tapped-in (TI) connections in dogs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight weeks post mandibular tooth extraction in six beagle dogs, two SI implants (OsseoSpeed(™), Astra Tech, DENTSPLY) and two TI implants (Integra-CP(™), Bicon LLC) were placed in one side of the mandible. The four experimental groups were as follows: (i) SI-placed equicrestally (SIC); (ii) TI-placed equicrestally (TIC); (iii) SI-placed 1.5 mm subcrestally (SIS); and (iv) TI-placed 1.5 mm subcrestally (TIS). Healing abutments were connected 12 weeks after implant placement. Sixteen weeks later, the dogs were sacrificed and histomorphometric analysis was performed. Histometrical outcomes were evaluated using a nonparametric Brunner-Langer model. RESULTS: Mean distance from the IAI to first bone-implant contact (IAI-fBIC) was 0.88 mm (median: 0.77; SD: 0.54) for SIC group, 1.23 mm (median: 1.22; SD: 0.66) for TIC group, 0.41 mm (median: 0.31; SD: 0.36) for SIS group, and 0.41 mm (median: 0.26; SD: 0.45) for TIS group. Subcrestal groups showed lower IAI-fBIC compared with equicrestal groups (P < 0.001). Connective tissue presented similar measurements regardless of the IAI placement depth and IAI type (P > 0.05), but the epithelium length and peri-implant soft tissue length in subcrestal groups were significant larger than that in the equicrestal groups (P < 0.001 and P = 0.004, respectively). CONCLUSION: Subcrestal implant placement with tapered internal IAI is beneficial for bone contact with the implant neck, and concurrently, it may not increase the soft tissue inflammation around IAI.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the influence of implant-abutment interface (IAI) placement depth on bone remodeling around implants with two different types of tapered internal IAI: screwed-in (SI) and tapped-in (TI) connections in dogs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight weeks post mandibular tooth extraction in six beagle dogs, two SI implants (OsseoSpeed(™), Astra Tech, DENTSPLY) and two TI implants (Integra-CP(™), Bicon LLC) were placed in one side of the mandible. The four experimental groups were as follows: (i) SI-placed equicrestally (SIC); (ii) TI-placed equicrestally (TIC); (iii) SI-placed 1.5 mm subcrestally (SIS); and (iv) TI-placed 1.5 mm subcrestally (TIS). Healing abutments were connected 12 weeks after implant placement. Sixteen weeks later, the dogs were sacrificed and histomorphometric analysis was performed. Histometrical outcomes were evaluated using a nonparametric Brunner-Langer model. RESULTS: Mean distance from the IAI to first bone-implant contact (IAI-fBIC) was 0.88 mm (median: 0.77; SD: 0.54) for SIC group, 1.23 mm (median: 1.22; SD: 0.66) for TIC group, 0.41 mm (median: 0.31; SD: 0.36) for SIS group, and 0.41 mm (median: 0.26; SD: 0.45) for TIS group. Subcrestal groups showed lower IAI-fBIC compared with equicrestal groups (P < 0.001). Connective tissue presented similar measurements regardless of the IAI placement depth and IAI type (P > 0.05), but the epithelium length and peri-implant soft tissue length in subcrestal groups were significant larger than that in the equicrestal groups (P < 0.001 and P = 0.004, respectively). CONCLUSION: Subcrestal implant placement with tapered internal IAI is beneficial for bone contact with the implant neck, and concurrently, it may not increase the soft tissue inflammation around IAI.
Authors: Matteo Albertini; Federico Herrero-Climent; Carmen María Díaz-Castro; Jose Nart; Ana Fernández-Palacín; José Vicente Ríos-Santos; Mariano Herrero-Climent Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-01-29 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Mauro Marincola; Giorgio Lombardo; Jacopo Pighi; Giovanni Corrocher; Anna Mascellaro; Jeffrey Lehrberg; Pier Francesco Nocini Journal: Case Rep Dent Date: 2015-11-15