Grandi Tommaso, Guazzi Paolo, Samarani Rawad, Garuti Giovanna
Department of Integrated Activities of Specialised Head-Neck Surgery, University of Modena and Reggio, Emilia, Italy.
Eur J Oral Implantol. 2012 Spring;5(1):9-16.
To compare bone resorption around implants immediately loaded and restored using definitive abutments versus provisional abutments later replaced by custom-made abutments up to 12 months after implant placement.
28 patients with partial edentulism were selected for a two-implant supported immediate restoration and randomised to provisional abutment (PA) and definitive abutment (DA) groups (14 patients for each group). In the PA group, implants were immediately restored using a platform-switched provisional titanium abutment. In the DA group, definitive platform-switched titanium abutments were tightened. In both groups, a provisional restoration was adapted, avoiding occlusal contacts. All implants were definitively restored after 3 months. In the PA group, patients underwent the standard prosthetic protocol: the abutments were removed and impressions were made directly on the implant platform. In the DA group, patients underwent the 'one abutment at one time' protocol: impressions were made of the abutments using a retraction cord. Peri-implant marginal bone levels were assessed immediately after surgery, and at 6- and 12-month follow-up examinations.
At the 12-month follow-up no implant failed. In the PA group, peri-implant bone resorption was 0.359 mm after 6 months and 0.435 mm after 12 months. In the DA group, peri-implant bone resorption was 0.065 mm after 6 months and 0.094 mm after 12 months. There were statistically significant differences between the two groups for peri-implant bone level changes at the 6-month (P < 0.001) and the 12-month (P < 0.001) follow-up: 0.294 mm (CI 95% 0.276; 0.312) and 0.341 mm (CI 95% 0.322; 0.36), respectively.
Within the limits of this study, it can be suggested that the non-removal of abutments placed at the time of surgery results in a statistically significant reduction of the crestal bone resorption around the immediately restored implants in cases of partial edentulism, however a difference of 0.3 mm may not have a clinical impact.
比较种植体植入后即刻使用最终基台进行加载和修复与使用临时基台随后更换为定制基台直至植入后12个月时种植体周围的骨吸收情况。
选择28例部分牙列缺损患者进行双种植体支持的即刻修复,并随机分为临时基台(PA)组和最终基台(DA)组(每组14例患者)。在PA组中,种植体使用平台转换的临时钛基台即刻修复。在DA组中,拧紧最终的平台转换钛基台。两组均采用临时修复体,避免咬合接触。所有种植体在3个月后进行最终修复。在PA组中,患者接受标准修复方案:拆除基台并直接在种植体平台上取印模。在DA组中,患者接受“一次一个基台”方案:使用缩龈线对基台取印模。术后即刻以及6个月和12个月随访时评估种植体周围边缘骨水平。
在12个月随访时,无种植体失败。在PA组中,种植体周围骨吸收在6个月时为0.359 mm,12个月时为0.435 mm。在DA组中,种植体周围骨吸收在6个月时为0.065 mm,12个月时为0.094 mm。两组在6个月(P < 0.001)和12个月(P < 0.001)随访时种植体周围骨水平变化存在统计学显著差异:分别为0.294 mm(95%CI 0.276;0.312)和0.341 mm(95%CI 0.322;0.36)。
在本研究的范围内,可以认为手术时放置的基台不拆除在部分牙列缺损病例中能使即刻修复种植体周围的嵴顶骨吸收在统计学上显著减少,然而0.3 mm的差异可能没有临床影响。