Premium
Effect of Platform Shift on Crestal Bone Levels and Mucosal Profile Following Flap Surgery and Subcrestal Implant Placement in Presence/Absence of Gap Defects
Author(s) -
Wenzel Brent A.,
Gamborena Inãki,
Lee Jaebum,
Fiorini Tiago,
Schüpbach Peter,
Wikesjö Ulf ME,
Susin Cristiano
Publication year - 2016
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.12216
Subject(s) - medicine , implant , dentistry , bone resorption , buccal administration , resorption , bone remodeling , dental implant , surgery
Background Physiologic remodeling resulting in crestal bone loss appears a common corollary to dental implant surgery. Several hypotheses and clinical strategies have been advanced to explain and avert crestal remodeling; however, causative mechanisms remain unclear and the efficacy of clinical protocols uncertain. Purpose The objective of the present study was to provide a histologic account of crestal bone levels and mucosal profile at implant sites receiving platform shift/switch and standard abutments following conventional flap surgery and subcrestal implant placement in presence or absence of crestal gap defects using a dog model. Materials and Methods Four dental implants were placed into the left/right edentulated posterior mandible in five adult male Hound Labrador mongrel dogs using flap surgery including subcrestal placement with/without a 1 × 5 mm (width × depth) gap defect, and using platform shift/switch and standard abutments. Block biopsies were collected for histological/histometric analysis following an 8‐week healing interval. Results No significant differences in crestal resorption were observed among experimental groups; crestal resorption being significantly more advanced at buccal than at lingual sites ( p < .001). Similarly, crestal bone‐implant contact was not significantly different among groups; crestal bone‐implant contact being consistently below the implant platform at buccal sites ( p < .01). Moreover, the peri‐implant mucosal profile was not statistically different among groups, the mucosal height being significantly greater at buccal than at lingual sites ( p < .001). Also, no significant differences among groups were observed for the apical extension of the epithelial attachment, the epithelial attachment being arrested more than 2 mm above the implant platform at both platform shift/switch and standard abutments. Conclusions Using a clinical strategy including flap surgery and subcrestal implant placement, implant technology comparing platform shift/switch with standard abutments, surgical approach, and abutment selection seems to have a limited impact on crestal remodeling, associated bone loss, and mucosal profile.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom