de Molon Rafael S, Lages Frederico S, Rivera Carolina P, de Souza Faloni Ana P, Margonar Rogerio, Queiroz Thallita P
Department of Diagnosis and Surgery, School of Dentistry at Araraquara, Sao Paulo State University-UNESP, Sao Paulo Brazil; Department of Rheumatology, Rheumatology Research and Advanced Therapeutics, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands, Phone: +5516981266745, e-mail:
Department of Clinics, Pathology and Surgery, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2017 Dec 1;18(12):1122-1129. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2187.
The aim of this nonrandomized controlled preliminary clinical trial was to compare treatment using short and conventional implants in the posterior region of the mandible after prosthesis installation by means of clinical, resonance frequency, and radiographic analyses.
A total of 10 patients with 40 dental implants already installed were included in this study. Four implants were installed for each subject, in which the length of the implants (short and conventional) was distributed according to the reminiscent alveolar bone in the left and right side of the mandible. All implants received splinted prosthesis after the osseointegration period. Analyses were performed immediately after prosthesis installation (T1), and 3 (T2) and 6 months (T3) after prosthesis placement.
The 6-month survival and success rates were 100% for the short and conventional implants. Probing depths (PDs) after 6 months did not show statistical differences between short and conventional implants. All groups showed mean implant stability quotient (ISQ) values above 60 in all periods evaluated, demonstrating great implant stability, and no differences were found between groups at T3. Radiographic measurements showed an increased bone loss for conventional implants compared with short implants in all the three periods evaluated.
Our findings suggest that treatment of resorbed posterior regions in the mandible with shorter dental implants is as reliable as treatment with conventional implants after 6 months of splinted prosthesis installation.
Short implants might be considered a predictable treatment alternative to bone augmentation or extensive surgical techniques in regions of restricted vertical bone height in the posterior region of the mandible.
这项非随机对照初步临床试验的目的是，通过临床、共振频率和影像学分析，比较在下颌骨后部安装假体后使用短种植体和传统种植体的治疗效果。
本研究共纳入10例已植入40颗牙种植体的患者。每位受试者植入4颗种植体，种植体（短种植体和传统种植体）的长度根据下颌骨左右两侧剩余牙槽骨情况分布。在骨整合期后，所有种植体均安装夹板式假体。在安装假体后即刻（T1）、安装假体后3个月（T2）和6个月（T3）进行分析。
短种植体和传统种植体的6个月生存率和成功率均为100%。6个月后的探诊深度（PD）在短种植体和传统种植体之间未显示出统计学差异。在所有评估阶段，所有组的种植体稳定性商数（ISQ）平均值均高于60，表明种植体稳定性良好，在T3时各组之间未发现差异。影像学测量显示，在所有三个评估阶段，与短种植体相比，传统种植体的骨吸收增加。
我们的研究结果表明，在下颌骨后部吸收区域使用较短的牙种植体进行治疗，在安装夹板式假体6个月后，与使用传统种植体治疗一样可靠。
在颌骨后部垂直骨高度受限的区域，短种植体可能被认为是一种可预测的治疗选择，可替代骨增量或广泛的外科技术。
