Premium
Effects of Immediate and Delayed Loading on Peri‐Implant Trabecular Structures: A Cone Beam CT Evaluation
Author(s) -
Huang Yan,
Dessel Jeroen,
Liang Xin,
Depypere Maarten,
Zhong Weijian,
Ma Guowu,
Lambrichts Ivo,
Maes Frederik,
Jacobs Reinhilde
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
clinical implant dentistry and related research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.338
H-Index - 85
eISSN - 1708-8208
pISSN - 1523-0899
DOI - 10.1111/cid.12063
Subject(s) - coronal plane , implant , cone beam computed tomography , premolar , medicine , dentistry , osseointegration , reduction (mathematics) , dental implant , orthodontics , molar , computed tomography , anatomy , surgery , geometry , mathematics
Purpose To develop a method for characterizing trabecular bone microarchitecture using cone beam computed tomography ( CBCT ) and to evaluate trabecular bone changes after rehabilitation using immediate versus delayed implant protocols. Materials and Methods Six mongrel dogs randomly received 27 titanium implants in the maxillary incisor or mandibular premolar areas, following one of four protocols: (1) normal extraction socket healing; (2) immediate implant placement and immediate loading; (3) delayed implant placement and delayed loading; (4) delayed implant placement and immediate loading. The animals were euthanized at 8 weeks, and block biopsies were scanned using high resolution CBCT . Standard bone structural variables were assessed in coronal, middle, and apical levels. Results Coronal and middle regions had more compact, more platelike, and thicker trabeculae. Protocols (2), (3), and (4) had significantly higher values ( p < 0.001) than protocol (1) for bone surface density, bone surface volume ratio, and connectivity density, while significantly lower values ( p < 0.001) were found for trabecular separation and fractal dimension. However, protocols (2), (3), and (4) did not show significantly different bone remodeling. Conclusions Compared with normal extraction healing, the implant protocols have an improved bone structural integration. Results do not suggest a different bone remodeling pattern when a delayed versus an immediate implant protocol is used.