Cannizzaro Gioacchino, Felice Pietro, Ippolito Daniela Rita, Velasco-Ortega Eugenio, Esposito Marco
Eur J Oral Implantol. 2018;11(3):295-306.
To compare the outcome of cross-arch prostheses supported either by 5 mm long or 11.5 mm long implants placed flapless and immediately restored with a metal-resin screw-retained cross-arch prostheses.
Thirty patients with edentulous or to-be- rendered edentulous mandibles, and 30 with edentulous maxillas, having sufficient bone to allow the placement of four and six implants respectively, of at least 11.5 mm long, were randomised according to a parallel group design into two equal groups and received either 5 mm or 11.5 mm long implants at one centre. Implants had a diameter of 5 mm, were to be placed flapless, and with an insertion torque of at least 50 Ncm. Mandibles received four implants between the mental foramina. Implants were to be immediately loaded with metal-resin definitive prostheses the same day as implant placement. Patients were followed to 5 years post-loading and the outcome measures were: prosthesis and implant failures, complications, and peri-implant marginal bone level changes.
Four patients per group dropped out. Two prostheses were remade, one on short maxillary implants and one on long mandibular implants (difference in proportions = 0; 95% CI: -0.15 to 0.15; P = 1.000). Three patients lost six short implants vs three patients who lost four long implants (difference in proportions = 0; 95% CI: -0.19 to 0.19; P = 1.000). Four short implant patients were affected by complications vs five patients with long implants (difference in proportions = 0.04; 95% CI: -0.17 to 0.25; P = 1.000). There were no statistically significant differences for prostheses failures, implant failures and complications. Patients with mandibular short implants lost on average 0.22 mm of peri-implant bone at 5 years while patients with long mandibular implants lost 0.83 mm. Patients with maxillary short implants lost on average 0.30 mm of peri-implant bone at 5 years and patients with long maxillary implants lost 0.89 mm. Short implants showed less bone loss when compared with long implants and the differences up to 5 years were statistically significant both in maxillae (mean difference = 0.59 mm, 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.86 mm, P < .0001) and in mandibles (mean difference = 0.61 mm, 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.86 mm, P < 0.0001).
Flapless-placed 5 mm long implants achieved similar results as 11.5 mm long implants when supporting immediately loaded cross-arch prostheses both in maxillae and mandibles up to 5 years after loading. These results must be confirmed by other trials, and 10 years post-loading data is necessary before making reliable recommendations.
比较在不翻瓣植入且即刻用金属树脂螺丝固位的跨牙弓修复体进行修复的情况下,由5毫米长或11.5毫米长种植体支持的跨牙弓修复体的效果。
30例下颌无牙或即将无牙、有足够骨量分别允许植入4枚至少11.5毫米长种植体的患者,以及30例上颌无牙患者,根据平行组设计随机分为两组,在一个中心分别植入5毫米或11.5毫米长的种植体。种植体直径为5毫米,采用不翻瓣植入,植入扭矩至少为50牛厘米。下颌在颏孔之间植入4枚种植体。种植体植入当天即刻用金属树脂最终修复体进行加载。对患者进行随访至加载后5年,观察指标包括:修复体和种植体失败情况、并发症以及种植体周围边缘骨水平变化。
每组有4例患者退出。制作了2个修复体,1个用于上颌短种植体,1个用于下颌长种植体(比例差异=0;95%可信区间:-0.15至0.15;P=1.000)。3例患者丢失6枚短种植体,3例患者丢失4枚长种植体(比例差异=0;95%可信区间:-0.19至0.19;P=1.000)。4例短种植体患者出现并发症,5例长种植体患者出现并发症(比例差异=0.04;95%可信区间:-0.(此处原文有误,应为-0.17至0.25);P=1.000)。修复体失败、种植体失败和并发症方面无统计学显著差异。下颌短种植体患者在5年时种植体周围骨平均吸收0.22毫米,而下颌长种植体患者骨吸收0.83毫米。上颌短种植体患者在5年时种植体周围骨平均吸收0.30毫米,上颌长种植体患者骨吸收0.89毫米。与长种植体相比,短种植体骨吸收较少,在上颌(平均差异=0.59毫米,95%可信区间:0.33至0.86毫米,P<0.0001)和下颌(平均差异=0.61毫米,95%可信区间:0.36至0.86毫米,P<0.0001)中,直至5年时差异均具有统计学显著性。
在支持即刻加载的跨牙弓修复体时,不翻瓣植入的5毫米长种植体在加载后长达5年的时间里,在上颌和下颌均取得了与11.5毫米长种植体相似的效果。这些结果必须通过其他试验加以证实,并且在做出可靠推荐之前需要加载后10年的数据。