Premium
Effect of different implant placement depths on crestal bone levels and soft tissue behavior: A 5‐year randomized clinical trial
Author(s) -
Siqueira Rafael Amorim Cavalcanti,
Savaget Gonçalves Junior Robson,
Santos Paulo Gustavo Freitas,
Mattias Sartori Ivete Aparecida,
Wang HomLay,
Fontão Flavia Noemy Gasparini Kiatake
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
clinical oral implants research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.407
H-Index - 161
eISSN - 1600-0501
pISSN - 0905-7161
DOI - 10.1111/clr.13569
Subject(s) - implant , soft tissue , dentistry , medicine , significant difference , surgery
Objectives This randomized clinical trial analyzed the long‐term (5‐year) crestal bone changes and soft tissue dimensions surrounding implants with an internal tapered connection placed in the anterior mandibular region at different depths (equi‐ and subcrestal). Materials and methods Eleven edentulous patients were randomly divided in a split‐mouth design: 28 equicrestal implants (G1) and 27 subcrestal (1–3 mm) implants (G2). Five implants were placed per patient. All implants were immediately loaded. Standardized intraoral radiographs were used to evaluate crestal bone (CB) changes. Patients were assessed immediately, 4, 8, and 60 months after implant placement. The correlation between vertical mucosal thickness (VMT) and soft tissue recession was analyzed. Sub‐group analysis was also performed to evaluate the correlation between VMT and CB loss. Rank‐based ANOVA was used for comparison between groups ( α = .05). Results Fifty‐five implants (G1 = 28 and G2 = 27) were assessed. Implant and prosthetic survival rate were 100%. Subcrestal positioning resulted in less CB loss (−0.80 mm) when compared to equicrestal position (−0.99 mm), although the difference was not statistically significant ( p > .05). Significant CB loss was found within the G1 and G2 groups at two different measurement times (T4 and T60) ( p < .05). Implant placement depths and VMT had no effect on soft tissue recession ( p > .05). Conclusions There was no statistically significant difference in CB changes between subcrestal and equicrestal implant positioning; however, subcrestal position resulted in higher bone levels. Neither mucosal recession nor vertical mucosa thickness was influenced by different implant placement depths.