z-logo
Premium
Correlation between early perforation of cover screws and marginal bone loss: a retrospective study
Author(s) -
Van Assche Nele,
Collaert Bruno,
Coucke Wim,
Quirynen Marc
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
journal of clinical periodontology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.456
H-Index - 151
eISSN - 1600-051X
pISSN - 0303-6979
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-051x.2007.01158.x
Subject(s) - dentistry , medicine , implant , stage (stratigraphy) , perforation , radiography , gingival margin , orthodontics , surgery , materials science , paleontology , metallurgy , punching , biology
Aim: This retrospective study aimed to determine the consequence of early cover screw exposure on peri‐implant marginal bone level. Material and Methods: Sixty Astra Tech ® MicroThread implants installed in partially edentulous jaws were compared: 20 implants were placed following a two‐stage procedure and were unintentionally exposed to the oral cavity (two‐stage exposed), 20 implants were placed following a two‐stage procedure and were surgically exposed after a subgingival healing time of 3–6 months (two‐stage submerged), and 20 implants were placed following a one‐stage surgical protocol (one‐stage). Digital radiographs were taken at implant placement for all implants, and after abutment surgery for the two‐stage exposed and two‐stage submerged groups or after 3 months for the one‐stage group. Bone loss mesially and distally was measured with an on‐screen cursor after calibration. Results: Mean bone re‐modelling was 1.96 mm (range: 0.2–3.2 mm) around the two‐stage exposed implants, 0.01 mm (range: 0.0–0.3 mm) around the two‐stage submerged implants and 0.14 mm (range: 0.0–1.2 mm) around the one‐stage implants. Conclusion: The unintentional perforation of two‐stage implants resulted in significant bone destruction, probably because the biological width was not considered.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here