Fernández-Figares-Conde Iñigo, Castellanos-Cosano Lizett, Fernandez-Ruiz Juan-Alberto, Soriano-Santamaria Ismael, Hueto-Madrid Juan-Antonio, Gómez-Lagunas Javier, Romano-Laureato Roberto, Torres-Lagares Daniel
Department of Stomatology, School of Dentistry, University of Seville, C/Avicena s/n, 41009 Seville, Spain.
Independent Researcher, Pasaje Balafi 1, 07800 Ibiza, Spain.
Dent J (Basel). 2023 Jul 31;11(8):185. doi: 10.3390/dj11080185.
The aim of this prospective descriptive study was to analyse the possible variables associated with marginal bone loss in rehabilitated implants (Proclinic S.A.U, Zaragoza, Spain) two years after their prosthetic loading.
Three clinical centres collaborated for a period of two years after the prosthetic rehabilitation of the implants (Proclinic S.A.U, Zaragoza, Spain), in which marginal bone loss and the possible associated variables were evaluated. The collection form comprised different variables throughout different stages of the implant procedure, from implant insertion to the subsequent prosthetic rehabilitation, over a two-year period. Data of the patients and implant characteristics were studied. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS for qualitative (univariate logistic regressions, Chi2 test, and Haberman's corrected standardised residuals) and quantitative variables (Kolmogorov-Smirnov test).
The total study sample consisted of 218 implants (Proclinic S.A.U, Zaragoza, Spain). The sample presented a frequency of 99 men (45.4%) and 119 women (54.6%). The mean age of the patients among the reported cases was 58.56 ± 10.12 years. A statistically significant association was found between marginal bone loss 2 years after prosthetic rehabilitation placement and several variables, including age (under 55 years, 0.25 mm ± 0.56; 55-64 years, 0.74 mm ± 0.57; over 65 years, 0.63 mm ± 0.55; < 0.0001), gender (female, 0.74 mm ± 0.61; male, 0.34 mm ± 0.51; < 0.0001), bone quality (D1, 0.75 mm ± 0.62; D2, 0.43 mm ± 0.57; D3, 0.65 mm ± 0.60; < 0.01), implant diameter (up to 4 mm, 0.49 mm ± 0.58; more than 4 mm, 1.21 mm ± 0.30; < 0.0001), prosthetic connection type (direct to implant, 0.11 mm ± 0.58; transepithelial straight, 0.67 mm ± 0.57; transepithelial angled, 0.33 mm ± 0.25; < 0001), implant model (internal conical, 0.17 mm ± 0.24; external conical, 0.48 mm ± 0.61; external cylindrical, 1.12 mm ± 0.32; < 0.0001), prosthetic restoration type (full denture, 0.59 mm ± 0.59; partial denture, 0.50 mm ± 0.85; unitary crown, 0.08 mm ± 0.19; < 0.05), and insertion torque (>35 N/cm, 0.53 mm ± 0.58; <35 N/cm, 1.04 mm ± 0.63; < 0.01).
At 2 years, marginal bone loss following prosthetic rehabilitation was shown to be influenced by multiple factors. Correct implantological planning is of vital importance for successful rehabilitation.
这项前瞻性描述性研究的目的是分析修复后的种植体（西班牙萨拉戈萨Proclinic S.A.U公司）在进行修复加载两年后与边缘骨丢失相关的可能变量。
三个临床中心在种植体（西班牙萨拉戈萨Proclinic S.A.U公司）进行修复康复后的两年时间里展开合作，对边缘骨丢失及可能相关的变量进行评估。收集表格涵盖了从种植体植入到后续修复康复的两年期间不同阶段的不同变量。研究了患者数据和种植体特征。使用SPSS对定性变量（单变量逻辑回归、卡方检验和哈伯曼校正标准化残差）和定量变量（柯尔莫哥洛夫-斯米尔诺夫检验）进行统计分析。
研究总样本包括218颗种植体（西班牙萨拉戈萨Proclinic S.A.U公司）。样本中男性99例（45.4%），女性119例（54.6%）。报告病例中患者的平均年龄为58.56±10.12岁。在修复康复放置两年后的边缘骨丢失与多个变量之间发现了统计学上的显著关联，这些变量包括年龄（55岁以下，0.25毫米±0.56；55 - 64岁，0.74毫米±0.57；65岁以上，0.63毫米±0.55；<0.0001）、性别（女性，0.74毫米±0.61；男性，0.34毫米±0.51；<0.0001）、骨质量（D1，0.75毫米±0.62；D2，0.43毫米±0.57；D3，0.65毫米±0.60；<0.01）、种植体直径（4毫米及以下，0.49毫米±0.58；超过4毫米，1.21毫米±0.30；<0.0001）、修复连接类型（直接连接种植体，0.11毫米±0.58；经上皮直型，0.67毫米±0.57；经上皮角型，0.33毫米±0.25；<0.0001）、种植体型号（内锥形，0.17毫米±0.24；外锥形，0.48毫米±0.61；外圆柱形，1.12毫米±0.32；<0.0001）、修复体类型（全口义齿，0.59毫米±0.59；局部义齿，0.50毫米±0.85；单冠，0.08毫米±0.19；<0.05）以及植入扭矩（>35牛/厘米，0.53毫米±0.58；<35牛/厘米，1.04毫米±0.63；<0.01）。
在两年时，修复康复后的边缘骨丢失显示受多种因素影响。正确的种植计划对成功康复至关重要。
