Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2019 July/August;34(4):963–968. doi: 10.11607/jomi.7168. Epub 2019 Feb 15.
To analyze peri-implant bone loss around six different types of implant-prosthetic connections over a 2-year follow-up period.
A total of 120 implants were divided into six groups (n = 20), three with crestally and three with supracrestally placed implants, with different internal connections, placed in posterior sectors (molar and premolar), and bearing one-piece CAD/CAM restorations screwed directly to each implant's prosthetic platform. Bone height was measured from parallelized periapical radiographs taken at the moment of loading and 2 years later.
The patient sample included 61 subjects, 36 men and 25 women. Significant differences were found in bone loss between groups, the implant with internal hex and convergent transmucosal collar showing the least bone loss (P < .001) in comparison with the other designs. Supracrestally placed implants underwent less bone loss than crestally placed implants (P = .025).
Peri-implant bone loss is influenced by the level of implant placement in relation to the bone crest (crestal or supracrestal) and by the morphology of the prosthetic platform.
分析在 2 年的随访期内,六种不同类型的种植体-修复体连接方式周围的种植体周围骨丧失情况。
共将 120 个种植体分为 6 组(n=20),其中 3 组种植体采用牙槽嵴顶式放置,3 组采用牙槽嵴顶上方式放置,具有不同的内部连接方式,均放置在后牙区(磨牙和前磨牙),并通过 CAD/CAM 修复体直接固定在每个种植体的修复体平台上。在加载和 2 年后拍摄的平行根尖射线照片上测量骨高度。
患者样本包括 61 名受试者,36 名男性和 25 名女性。在不同组之间的骨丢失方面发现了显著差异,与其他设计相比,具有内部六角和会聚性穿粘膜领的种植体的骨丢失最少(P<.001)。与牙槽嵴顶式放置的种植体相比,牙槽嵴上方式放置的种植体的骨丢失更少(P=.025)。
种植体周围骨丢失受种植体相对于牙槽嵴(牙槽嵴顶或牙槽嵴顶上方)的放置水平以及修复体平台的形态影响。