Department of Periodontology, Oral Implantology, Removable & Implant Prosthodontics, Dental School, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Department of Oral Health Sciences ORHE; Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, Belgium.
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2018 Aug;20(4):455-462. doi: 10.1111/cid.12604. Epub 2018 Mar 25.
It is claimed that bone remodeling is limited when the implant neck has microthreads and an internal abutment connection. However, comparative studies, excluding confounding factors, are scarce.
This RCT aims to assess whether a coronal microthreaded design and an internal abutment connection affects crestal bone loss, up to one year of function.
Twenty-one maxillary edentulous patients were consecutively treated for a bar supported maxillary overdenture on four different implants with respectively: internal connection and microthreads on the implant neck (I MT); internal connection, no microthreads (I NMT), external connection, with microthreads (E MT), and external connection, without microthreads (E NMT). Other design features, s.a. width, surface topography, platform switch as well as surgical placement and prosthetic protocol were consistent. Implant survival and crestal bone loss in relation to the implant type were considered the main variables and a Friedman test for ordered alternatives was used to assess the difference in crestal bone loss between the different study implants.
Twenty-one patients received 83 study implants. Three implants failed within three months and required replacement. The total survival rate was 96.39% after one year and based on 21 patients and 80 implants a mean crestal bone loss of 0.25 mm (SD: 0.38; range: 0-1.48) was measured. After a follow-up of 3, 6, 12, and 21 months no statistically significant differences in crestal bone loss between the different study implants or the different time intervals could be identified.
From this RCT, it is concluded that the implant-abutment connection and a microthreaded external thread configuration have limited influence on crestal bone remodeling. The latter can be considered a multifactorial process and is more dependent on other factors such as biologic considerations than on implant design.
据称,当种植体颈部具有微螺纹和内部基台连接时,骨改建是有限的。然而,缺乏排除混杂因素的对照研究。
本 RCT 旨在评估冠状微螺纹设计和内部基台连接是否会影响种植体颈部的边缘骨吸收,直至功能使用一年。
连续对 21 例上颌无牙患者进行 4 种不同种植体的杆卡式上颌覆盖义齿修复治疗,分别为:种植体颈部带有内部连接和微螺纹(I MT);内部连接、无微螺纹(I NMT)、外部连接、带微螺纹(E MT)和外部连接、无微螺纹(E NMT)。其他设计特征,如宽度、表面形貌、平台转换以及手术植入和修复体方案均保持一致。种植体存活率和与种植体类型相关的边缘骨吸收被视为主要变量,采用有序替代的 Friedman 检验评估不同研究种植体之间的边缘骨吸收差异。
21 例患者共植入 83 枚研究用种植体。3 枚种植体在 3 个月内失败并需要更换。一年后总存活率为 96.39%,基于 21 例患者和 80 枚种植体,平均边缘骨吸收量为 0.25mm(SD:0.38;范围:0-1.48)。在 3、6、12 和 21 个月的随访中,不同研究种植体或不同时间间隔之间的边缘骨吸收无统计学差异。
本 RCT 表明,种植体-基台连接和外螺纹的微螺纹结构对边缘骨重塑的影响有限。后者可被视为一个多因素过程,更多地依赖于生物学因素,而不是种植体设计。