Rajasekar Arvina
Department of Periodontology, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences (SIMATS), Saveetha University, Chennai, India.
J Long Term Eff Med Implants. 2025;35(2):7-14. doi: 10.1615/JLongTermEffMedImplants.2024051955.
Implant dentistry is a widely utilized treatment approach for fully or partially edentulous patients. To enhance the success rates of dental implants, various surface modifications have been developed. This study aimed to compare clinical and radiographic parameters in patients with sandblasted acid-etched versus anodized surface dental implants. In this prospective clinical study, 78 patients who had undergone implant placement for missing single posterior tooth in mandible using sandblasted acid-etched and anodized surface dental implants during August 2019-December 2019 were enrolled according to strict inclusion and exclusion criteria and were categorized into Group 1: SLA (n = 27), Group 2: SLActive (n = 26), Group 3: TiUnite (n = 25) based on the surface modification of the implants. Peri-implant probing depth (PPD) and crestal bone loss (CBL) measurements were carried out at 3 months and 1-year intervals. For intergroup comparison, one-way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD post hoc test were used. For intragroup comparison, paired t test was used. PPD and CBL in Group 3 implants was significantly higher than Groups 1 and 2 (P ≤ 0.05). On pairwise comparison, there was a statistically significant difference in PPD and CBL between the groups at baseline (P ≤ 0.05) and 1-year follow-up (P ≤ 0.05) except for Group 1 vs. Group 2 at 1-year follow-up (P > 0.05). Intragroup comparison of PPD and CBL showed that there was a statistically significant difference from baseline in all the three groups in terms of PPD (P ≤ 0.05) and CBL (P ≤ 0.05). Patients with anodized dental implants exhibited greater PPD and CBL compared with those with sandblasted acid-etched implants.
种植牙科是一种广泛应用于全口或部分无牙患者的治疗方法。为提高牙种植体的成功率，已开发出各种表面改性方法。本研究旨在比较喷砂酸蚀表面与阳极氧化表面牙种植体患者的临床和影像学参数。在这项前瞻性临床研究中，根据严格的纳入和排除标准，纳入了2019年8月至2019年12月期间使用喷砂酸蚀和阳极氧化表面牙种植体在下颌植入单颗后牙缺失种植体的78例患者，并根据种植体的表面改性分为第1组：SLA（n = 27），第2组：SLActive（n = 26），第3组：TiUnite（n = 25）。分别在3个月和1年间隔时进行种植体周围探诊深度（PPD）和牙槽嵴骨吸收（CBL）测量。组间比较采用单因素方差分析和Tukey's HSD事后检验。组内比较采用配对t检验。第3组种植体的PPD和CBL显著高于第1组和第2组（P≤0.05）。两两比较显示，除1年随访时第1组与第2组外（P>0.05），各组在基线时（P≤0.05）和1年随访时（P≤0.05）的PPD和CBL存在统计学显著差异。PPD和CBL的组内比较显示，所有三组在PPD（P≤0.05）和CBL（P≤0.05）方面与基线相比均存在统计学显著差异。与喷砂酸蚀种植体患者相比，阳极氧化牙种植体患者表现出更大的PPD和CBL。
