Pablo Galindo-Moreno1, Ana León-Cano1, Alberto Monje2, Inmaculada Ortega-Oller1, Francisco O'Valle3, Andrés Catena4. 1. Oral Surgery and Implant Dentistry Department, School of Dentistry, University of Granada, Granada, Spain. 2. Department of Periodontics and Oral Medicine, School of Dentistry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 3. Department of Pathology, School of Medicine & IBIMER, University of Granada, Granada, Spain. 4. Department of Experimental Psychology, School of Psychology, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose was to radiographically analyze and compare the marginal bone loss (MBL) between implants with different mismatching distance and to study the influence of the prosthetic abutment height on the MBL in association with the related mismatching distances. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 108 patients in whom 228 implants were placed, 180 with diameter of 4.5 mm and 48 with diameter of 5 mm. All patients received OsseoSpeed™ implants with internal tapered conical connection (Denstply Implants). Different mismatching distances were obtained, given that all implants were loaded with the same uni-abutment type (Lilac; Denstply Implants). Data were gathered on age, gender, bone substratum, smoking habits, previous history of periodontitis, and prosthetic features. MBL was analyzed radiographically at 6 and 18 months post-loading. RESULTS: Mixed linear analysis of mesial and distal MBL values yielded significant effects of abutment, implant diameter, follow-up period, bone substratum, smoking, and abutment × time interaction. MBL was greater at 18 vs. 6 months, for short vs. long abutments, for grafted vs. pristine bone, for a heavier smoking habit, and for implants with a diameter of 5.0 vs. 4.5 mm. CONCLUSION: Greater mismatching does not minimize the MBL; abutment height, smoking habit, and bone substratum may play a role in the MBL over the short- and medium term.
PURPOSE: The purpose was to radiographically analyze and compare the marginal bone loss (MBL) between implants with different mismatching distance and to study the influence of the prosthetic abutment height on the MBL in association with the related mismatching distances. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 108 patients in whom 228 implants were placed, 180 with diameter of 4.5 mm and 48 with diameter of 5 mm. All patients received OsseoSpeed™ implants with internal tapered conical connection (Denstply Implants). Different mismatching distances were obtained, given that all implants were loaded with the same uni-abutment type (Lilac; Denstply Implants). Data were gathered on age, gender, bone substratum, smoking habits, previous history of periodontitis, and prosthetic features. MBL was analyzed radiographically at 6 and 18 months post-loading. RESULTS: Mixed linear analysis of mesial and distal MBL values yielded significant effects of abutment, implant diameter, follow-up period, bone substratum, smoking, and abutment × time interaction. MBL was greater at 18 vs. 6 months, for short vs. long abutments, for grafted vs. pristine bone, for a heavier smoking habit, and for implants with a diameter of 5.0 vs. 4.5 mm. CONCLUSION: Greater mismatching does not minimize the MBL; abutment height, smoking habit, and bone substratum may play a role in the MBL over the short- and medium term.
Authors: José Vicente Ríos-Santos; Gregorio Tello-González; Pedro Lázaro-Calvo; Francisco Javier Gil Mur; Blanca Ríos-Carrasco; Ana Fernández-Palacín; Mariano Herrero-Climent Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-12-17 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Franz J Strauss; Marina Siegenthaler; Christoph H F Hämmerle; Irena Sailer; Ronald E Jung; Daniel S Thoma Journal: Clin Oral Implants Res Date: 2022-05-29 Impact factor: 5.021
Authors: Davide Farronato; Pietro Mario Pasini; Mattia Manfredini; Cristian Scognamiglio; Andrea Alain Orsina; Marco Farronato Journal: BMC Oral Health Date: 2020-02-17 Impact factor: 2.757
Authors: María Costa Castillo; Martín Laguna Martos; Rocío Marco Pitarch; Marina García Selva; Silvia Del Cid Rodríguez; Carla Fons-Badal; Rubén Agustín Panadero Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-03-15 Impact factor: 3.390