Pellicer-Chover Hilario, Rojo-Sanchís Julio, Peñarrocha-Diago Miguel, Viña-Almunia José, Peñarrocha-Oltra David, Peñarrocha-Diago Maria
DDS, PhD. Collaborating Professor of the Master of Oral Surgery and Implant Dentistry, Oral Surgery Unit, Department of Stomatology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Spain.
DDS, Master in Oral Surgery and Implant Dentistry, Department of Stomatology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Spain.
J Clin Exp Dent. 2020 Sep 1;12(9):e870-e876. doi: 10.4317/jced.56652. eCollection 2020 Sep.
Subcrestal implant placement has been suggested as a method that could contribute to maintain the periimplant soft and hard tissues in comparison with crestal placement. The objective of this study was to investigate the relationship between implant placement at different depths in the alveolar bone and (a) the thickness of the buccal bone plate (BBP); and (b) crestal cortical bone thickness, based on the use of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).
A cross-sectional study was performed, analyzing CBCT scans from the database of the Oral Surgery Unit of the University of Valencia. Individuals with single missing teeth in posterior sectors were included. Two trained dentists used a software application to plan implant placement at four different depths from the bone crest (from 0-2 mm subcrestal). The thickness of the BBP was measured at each established depth, tracing a line from the implant platform to the outermost part of the facial alveolar bone, and the ratio between the implant platform and cortical bone thickness was calculated.
The study sample consisted of 64 patients. In the case of implants placed in a crestal position, the distance from the platform to the BBP was 1.99±1.10 mm. This distance increased significantly (<0.001) with the planned implant placement depth, reaching an average of 2.90±1.22 mm when placement was 2 mm subcrestal. Subcrestal implant placement at this depth implied surpassing the cortical bone in 91% of the cases.
Radiological planning of implant placement in a subcrestal position results in a greater distance from the implant platform to the BBP. In general terms, planning implant placement at a depth of 2 mm subcrestal surpassed the cortical bone in 91% of the cases. Subcrestal implant, cortical bone thickness, buccal bone plate, cone-beam computed tomography.
与嵴顶植入相比，牙槽嵴顶下植入被认为是一种有助于维持种植体周围软硬组织的方法。本研究的目的是基于锥形束计算机断层扫描（CBCT），研究牙槽骨不同深度的种植体植入与（a）颊侧骨板（BBP）厚度；以及（b）嵴顶皮质骨厚度之间的关系。
进行了一项横断面研究，分析了来自瓦伦西亚大学口腔外科数据库的CBCT扫描图像。纳入后牙区单颗牙缺失的个体。两名经过培训的牙医使用软件应用程序在距牙槽嵴顶四个不同深度（从牙槽嵴顶下0 - 2毫米）规划种植体植入。在每个设定深度测量BBP的厚度，从种植体平台向面部牙槽骨最外侧画一条线，并计算种植体平台与皮质骨厚度的比值。
研究样本包括64名患者。对于置于嵴顶位置的种植体，从平台到BBP的距离为1.99±1.10毫米。随着种植体植入深度的增加，该距离显著增加（<0.001），当植入深度为牙槽嵴顶下2毫米时，平均距离达到2.90±1.22毫米。在此深度进行牙槽嵴顶下种植体植入时，91%的病例种植体超出了皮质骨。
牙槽嵴顶下种植体植入的放射学规划导致种植体平台到BBP的距离更大。一般来说，在牙槽嵴顶下2毫米深度规划种植体植入时，91%的病例种植体超出了皮质骨。牙槽嵴顶下种植体、皮质骨厚度、颊侧骨板、锥形束计算机断层扫描。
