Giannopoulou Catherine, Bernard Jean-Pierre, Buser Daniel, Carrel Anne, Belser Urs C
Department of Periodontology and Oral Pathophysiology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Geneva, Switzerland.
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003 Mar-Apr;18(2):173-81.
The aim of the present study was to evaluate longitudinally the stability of a cohort of esthetic implants that had been in function for at least 1 year prior to the baseline examination.
Sixty-one maxillary anterior ITI implants in 45 systemically healthy patients, supporting single crown restorations, were randomly selected and examined. Clinical, microbiologic, and biochemical parameters were recorded at baseline and again after 3 years. Clinical examination included Plaque Index, Gingival Index, bleeding on probing, probing pocket depth (PPD), distance between implant shoulder and mucosal margin (DIM), and mobility. Dark-field microscopy and immunofluorescence were used to evaluate the bacteria morphotypes and the presence of 5 specific pathogenic bacteria, respectively. Peri-implant crevicular fluid (PICF) was collected at the mesial and distal sites of each implant, and total amounts of 3 biochemical markers were assessed: alkaline phosphatase was measured by using p-nitrophenyl-phosphate as substrate, elastase activity was measured by the use of a low-molecular-weight fluorogenic substrate, and the inhibitor alpha2-macroglobulin (alpha2M) was measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.
The only statistically significant differences between baseline and follow-up examination concerned PPD and DIM measurements, which increased slightly. The remainder of the clinical measurements and almost all of the microbiologic and biochemical parameters did not change significantly. Furthermore, no associations were observed between the above results and the number of years that implants had been in function.
Based on an observation period of 4 to 9 years (mean 6.8 years at the time of the follow-up examination), it can be concluded that in patients with appropriate oral hygiene, the intracrevicular position of the restoration margin does not appear to adversely affect peri-implant health and stability.
本研究的目的是纵向评估一组在基线检查前已发挥功能至少1年的美学种植体的稳定性。
随机选择45例全身健康患者的61颗上颌前牙ITI种植体，这些种植体支持单冠修复，并进行检查。在基线时和3年后再次记录临床、微生物学和生化参数。临床检查包括菌斑指数、牙龈指数、探诊出血、探诊袋深度（PPD）、种植体肩部与黏膜边缘之间的距离（DIM）以及松动度。分别使用暗视野显微镜和免疫荧光评估细菌形态类型和5种特定病原菌的存在情况。在每个种植体的近中和远中部位收集种植体周围龈沟液（PICF），并评估3种生化标志物的总量：使用对硝基苯磷酸作为底物测量碱性磷酸酶，使用低分子量荧光底物测量弹性蛋白酶活性，通过酶联免疫吸附测定法测量抑制剂α2-巨球蛋白（α2M）。
基线检查与随访检查之间唯一具有统计学意义的差异涉及PPD和DIM测量值，二者略有增加。其余临床测量值以及几乎所有微生物学和生化参数均无显著变化。此外，未观察到上述结果与种植体发挥功能的年数之间存在关联。
基于4至9年的观察期（随访检查时平均为6.8年），可以得出结论，在口腔卫生良好的患者中，修复边缘在龈沟内的位置似乎不会对种植体周围健康和稳定性产生不利影响。
