Premium
Marginal bone loss around three different implant systems: radiographic evaluation after 1 year
Author(s) -
PIAO C. M.,
LEE J. E.,
KOAK J. Y.,
KIM S. K.,
RHYU I. C.,
HAN C. H.,
HERR Y.,
HEO S. J.
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
journal of oral rehabilitation
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.991
H-Index - 93
eISSN - 1365-2842
pISSN - 0305-182X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2009.01988.x
Subject(s) - coronal plane , implant , radiography , dentistry , medicine , orthodontics , osseointegration , surgery , radiology
Summary This study was designed to radiographically evaluate the effect of surface macro‐and microstructures within the coronal portion of the external hex implant at the marginal bone change after loading. The fifty‐four patients included in the study were randomly assigned to treatment groups with rough‐surface implants (TiUnite, n = 45), a hybrid of smooth and rough surface implants (Restore, n = 45) or rough‐surface with microthreads implants (Hexplant, n = 45). Clinical and radiographic examinations were conducted at the time of implant loading (baseline) and at 1‐year post‐loading. A three‐level mixed‐effect ancova was used to test the significance of the mean marginal bone change of the three implant groups from baseline to 1‐year follow‐up. At 1‐year, significant differences were noted in marginal bone loss recorded for the three groups ( P < 0·0001). The rough surface with microthread implants had a mean crestal bone loss of 0·42 ± 0·27 mm; the rough surface implants, 0·81 ± 0·27 mm; and the hybrid surface implants, 0·89 ± 0·41 mm. Within the limitations of this study, a rough surface with microthreads at the coronal part of implant maintained the marginal bone level against functional loading better than implants without these two features.