Chun-Teh Lee1, Duong Tran2, Ming-Dih Jeng3,4, Yi-Tung Shen5. 1. The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Dentistry, Department of Periodontics and Dental Hygiene, Houston, TX. 2. Tufts University School of Dental Medicine, Research Administration Dental, Boston, MA. 3. Far Eastern Memorial Hospital, New Taipei City, Taiwan. 4. Private Practice, Jin-Pin Dental Clinic, Taipei, Taiwan. 5. National Taiwan University College of Public Health, Taipei, Taiwan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The design of hybrid surface implants takes advantage of characteristics of two different textures to improve clinical outcomes. To date, there are limited numbers of studies reporting the clinical results of hybrid surface implants. This study aimed to assess hybrid surface implants with two different rough textures in regard to survival, marginal bone level change, and biological complications. METHODS: Retrospective review of dental records was conducted for 161 patients who had 460 hybrid surface implants to analyze survival rate. These implants had the dual sandblasted and anode oxidized surface. Sixty patients with 192 implants who had consecutive radiographs taken at specific time points and complete clinical examinations were included in the comprehensive analysis. The associations between patient- and implant-related characteristics, and clinical results were analyzed by log-rank test, Cox regression, and linear regression analysis. RESULTS: Cumulative survival at 12, 36, and 60 months after placement was 97.4%, 96.4%, and 95.8%, respectively. The average marginal bone level change from baseline to the last visit was 0.31 ± 0.68 mm and 0.34 ± 0.77 mm at the mesial and distal sites, respectively. Prevalence of peri-implantitis was 0.5% at the implant level and 1.7% at the patient level. Implant site was associated with implant failure (P = 0.03). Smoking habit, history of periodontitis, and implant site were significantly associated with marginal bone level change (P = 0.001, < 0.001, 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Hybrid rough surface implants had high survival rate, stable bone level, and low prevalence of biological complications. This surface design demonstrated promising clinical outcomes. More studies are needed to further support the clinical advantages of hybrid surface implants.
BACKGROUND: The design of hybrid surface implants takes advantage of characteristics of two different textures to improve clinical outcomes. To date, there are limited numbers of studies reporting the clinical results of hybrid surface implants. This study aimed to assess hybrid surface implants with two different rough textures in regard to survival, marginal bone level change, and biological complications. METHODS: Retrospective review of dental records was conducted for 161 patients who had 460 hybrid surface implants to analyze survival rate. These implants had the dual sandblasted and anode oxidized surface. Sixty patients with 192 implants who had consecutive radiographs taken at specific time points and complete clinical examinations were included in the comprehensive analysis. The associations between patient- and implant-related characteristics, and clinical results were analyzed by log-rank test, Cox regression, and linear regression analysis. RESULTS: Cumulative survival at 12, 36, and 60 months after placement was 97.4%, 96.4%, and 95.8%, respectively. The average marginal bone level change from baseline to the last visit was 0.31 ± 0.68 mm and 0.34 ± 0.77 mm at the mesial and distal sites, respectively. Prevalence of peri-implantitis was 0.5% at the implant level and 1.7% at the patient level. Implant site was associated with implant failure (P = 0.03). Smoking habit, history of periodontitis, and implant site were significantly associated with marginal bone level change (P = 0.001, < 0.001, 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Hybrid rough surface implants had high survival rate, stable bone level, and low prevalence of biological complications. This surface design demonstrated promising clinical outcomes. More studies are needed to further support the clinical advantages of hybrid surface implants.