Department Biomaterials, Institute Surgical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg University, PO Box 412, SE 405 30, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012 Jun;14(3):313-20. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2010.00273.x. Epub 2010 Mar 12.
The Neoss implant system has been available since 2004. Few studies documenting the clinical performance of this implant are available.
To study the stability and clinical/radiographic outcomes of Neoss implants 1 year of loading when using a two-stage protocol.
Ninety (90) consecutive patients scheduled for implant treatment using a two-stage procedure were enrolled in a prospective follow-up study. A total of 218 implants (Neoss System, Bimodal surface, Neoss Ltd, Harrogate, UK) in diameters of 3.5, 4.0, and 4.5 mm and in lengths from 7 to 15 mm were placed to support 29 single tooth replacements, 53 partial bridges, 5 full bridges, and 10 overdentures in both jaws. Abutment connection was made after a healing period of 3-4 months. The patients were followed during 1 year of loading with clinical, radiographic, and resonance frequency analysis (Osstell Mentor™, Osstell AB, Gothenburg, Sweden) examinations. Prostheses were removed at the annual check-up for individual testing of implant stability.
Three implant failures were experienced, giving a survival rate of 98.6% after 1 year. A mean bone loss of 0.6 mm (SD 0.8) was observed after 1 year. There was a significant inverse correlation between implant diameter and marginal bone loss (p < .003). The mean implant stability quotient levels were 73.7 (SD 7.6), 74.4 (SD 6.4), and 76.7 (SD 5.2) at placement, abutment connection, and first annual check-up, respectively. The stability had increased significantly from placement to 1 year (p < .001) and from abutment to 1 year (p < .0001). Implant stability was higher in the mandible than in the maxilla at all time points. There was a significant correlation between bone quality and stability at placement (p < .0001) and abutment connection (p < .001) but not after 1 year.
The use of Neoss implants for prosthetic rehabilitation of consecutive edentate patients with different needs resulted in predictable clinical and radiographic outcomes after 1 year of loading. Implant stability measurements revealed a favorable bone tissue reaction to the implants.
Neoss 种植系统自 2004 年以来已经投入使用。目前,仅有少数研究记录了该种植体的临床性能。
研究使用两阶段方案时 Neoss 种植体 1 年负荷的稳定性和临床/影像学结果。
90 名连续患者接受两阶段手术治疗,纳入前瞻性随访研究。共植入 218 颗 Neoss 种植体(Neoss 系统,双模式表面,Neoss 有限公司,哈罗盖特,英国),直径 3.5、4.0 和 4.5mm,长度 7-15mm,以支持 29 颗单牙修复体、53 颗部分桥体、5 颗全桥体和 10 颗上下颌覆盖义齿。在 3-4 个月的愈合期后进行基台连接。患者在 1 年的负荷期内接受临床、影像学和共振频率分析(Osstell Mentor™,Osstell AB,哥德堡,瑞典)检查。每年的检查时取下修复体,对种植体稳定性进行个体测试。
在 1 年后,3 颗种植体失败,存活率为 98.6%。1 年后观察到平均骨损失 0.6mm(SD 0.8)。种植体直径与边缘骨丢失呈显著负相关(p<.003)。种植体放置、基台连接和第一次年度检查时的平均种植体稳定性指数分别为 73.7(SD 7.6)、74.4(SD 6.4)和 76.7(SD 5.2)。种植体稳定性从放置时到 1 年时显著增加(p<.001),从基台连接到 1 年时显著增加(p<.0001)。在所有时间点,下颌的种植体稳定性均高于上颌。种植体放置时(p<.0001)和基台连接时(p<.001)的骨质量与稳定性呈显著相关性,但 1 年后无相关性。
使用 Neoss 种植体为有不同需求的连续无牙患者进行修复治疗,1 年后的临床和影像学结果具有可预测性。种植体稳定性测量显示,种植体有良好的骨组织反应。