Premium
One‐Year Outcomes of Neoss Bimodal Implants. A Prospective Clinical, Radiographic, and RFA Study
Author(s) -
Sennerby Lars,
Andersson Peter,
Verrocchi Damiano,
Viinamäki Rauno
Publication year - 2012
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/j.1708-8208.2010.00273.x
Subject(s) - implant stability quotient , resonance frequency analysis , medicine , implant , radiography , dentistry , abutment , prospective cohort study , survival rate , osseointegration , orthodontics , surgery , civil engineering , engineering
Background: The Neoss implant system has been available since 2004. Few studies documenting the clinical performance of this implant are available. Purpose: To study the stability and clinical/radiographic outcomes of Neoss implants 1 year of loading when using a two‐stage protocol. Materials and Methods: Ninety (90) consecutive patients scheduled for implant treatment using a two‐stage procedure were enrolled in a prospective follow‐up study. A total of 218 implants (Neoss System, Bimodal surface, Neoss Ltd, Harrogate, UK) in diameters of 3.5, 4.0, and 4.5 mm and in lengths from 7 to 15 mm were placed to support 29 single tooth replacements, 53 partial bridges, 5 full bridges, and 10 overdentures in both jaws. Abutment connection was made after a healing period of 3–4 months. The patients were followed during 1 year of loading with clinical, radiographic, and resonance frequency analysis (Osstell Mentor™, Osstell AB, Gothenburg, Sweden) examinations. Prostheses were removed at the annual check‐up for individual testing of implant stability. Results: Three implant failures were experienced, giving a survival rate of 98.6% after 1 year. A mean bone loss of 0.6 mm (SD 0.8) was observed after 1 year. There was a significant inverse correlation between implant diameter and marginal bone loss ( p < .003). The mean implant stability quotient levels were 73.7 (SD 7.6), 74.4 (SD 6.4), and 76.7 (SD 5.2) at placement, abutment connection, and first annual check‐up, respectively. The stability had increased significantly from placement to 1 year ( p < .001) and from abutment to 1 year ( p < .0001). Implant stability was higher in the mandible than in the maxilla at all time points. There was a significant correlation between bone quality and stability at placement ( p < .0001) and abutment connection ( p < .001) but not after 1 year. Conclusions: The use of Neoss implants for prosthetic rehabilitation of consecutive edentate patients with different needs resulted in predictable clinical and radiographic outcomes after 1 year of loading. Implant stability measurements revealed a favorable bone tissue reaction to the implants.