Homayoun H Zadeh1, Felix Guljé2, Paul J Palmer3, Ingemar Abrahamsson4, Stephen Chen5, Ramin Mahallati1, Clark M Stanford6. 1. University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. 2. Private practice "de Mondhoek", Apeldoorn, The Netherlands. 3. King's College Dental Institute, London, UK. 4. Department of Periodontology, The Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden. 5. Department of Periodontics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Vic., Australia. 6. University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The present multi-center randomized controlled clinical trial sought to compare the marginal bone level (MBL) changes and survival of 6- and 11-mm implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS:Ninety-five patients receiving a total of 209 dental implants were enrolled. Subjects were randomly allocated to two cohorts: test (4.0 × 6 mm; N = 108) or control (4.0 × 11 mm; N = 101) implant groups. To be randomized, all edentulous sites were anatomically qualified to receive 11 mm implant. Two to three implants were placed in maxillary or mandibular posterior regions and loaded with splinted provisional restoration after 6 weeks and definitive restoration 6 months thereafter. Test and control implants were followed by clinical and radiographic examinations on an annual basis up to 3 years. RESULTS:Radiographic assessment of MBL 3 years after loading revealed the bone to be located at 0.27 mm (±0.40) and 0.44 mm (±0.74) apical to the implant platform in the test and control groups, respectively. During the 3 years of follow-up since loading, 0.04 mm (±0.43) MBL gain and 0.02 mm (±0.76) of MBL loss were observed in the 6-mm (test) and 11-mm (control) groups, respectively. The MBL's for test and control were significantly different (p = 0.000) in favor of short implants. The cumulative survival rates from placement after 3 years were 96% and 99% for the 6- and 11-mm implants, respectively, with no statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Reconstruction of partially edentulous posterior maxilla or mandible with 6- or 11-mm implants led to stable marginal bone level and high implant survival rate after 3 years.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: The present multi-center randomized controlled clinical trial sought to compare the marginal bone level (MBL) changes and survival of 6- and 11-mm implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Ninety-five patients receiving a total of 209 dental implants were enrolled. Subjects were randomly allocated to two cohorts: test (4.0 × 6 mm; N = 108) or control (4.0 × 11 mm; N = 101) implant groups. To be randomized, all edentulous sites were anatomically qualified to receive 11 mm implant. Two to three implants were placed in maxillary or mandibular posterior regions and loaded with splinted provisional restoration after 6 weeks and definitive restoration 6 months thereafter. Test and control implants were followed by clinical and radiographic examinations on an annual basis up to 3 years. RESULTS: Radiographic assessment of MBL 3 years after loading revealed the bone to be located at 0.27 mm (±0.40) and 0.44 mm (±0.74) apical to the implant platform in the test and control groups, respectively. During the 3 years of follow-up since loading, 0.04 mm (±0.43) MBL gain and 0.02 mm (±0.76) of MBL loss were observed in the 6-mm (test) and 11-mm (control) groups, respectively. The MBL's for test and control were significantly different (p = 0.000) in favor of short implants. The cumulative survival rates from placement after 3 years were 96% and 99% for the 6- and 11-mm implants, respectively, with no statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Reconstruction of partially edentulous posterior maxilla or mandible with 6- or 11-mm implants led to stable marginal bone level and high implant survival rate after 3 years.
Authors: Guillermo Pardo-Zamora; Antonio José Ortiz-Ruíz; Fabio Camacho-Alonso; José Francisco Martínez-Marco; Juan Manuel Molina-González; Núria Piqué-Clusella; Ascensión Vicente-Hernández Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-05-26 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Felix L Guljé; Henny J A Meijer; Ingemar Abrahamsson; Christopher A Barwacz; Stephen Chen; Paul J Palmer; Homayoun Zadeh; Clark M Stanford Journal: Clin Oral Implants Res Date: 2020-10-23 Impact factor: 5.977