Parameters Associated with Marginal Bone Loss around Implant after Prosthetic Loading (original) (raw)
Related papers
Current Issues in Pharmacy and Medical Sciences, 2018
The marginal bone loss around dental implants is an important indicator that helps to evaluate the course and the final outcome of implant-prosthetic treatment. It is, therefore, important to understand the factors that may affect this. The aim of the study was to assess the impact of the specific characteristics of implant-prosthetic treatment on the marginal bone loss around implants. The study included 28 patients, aged 37-66 years, treated with dental implants. Every patient received at least one of the two types of implants: with Morse taper connection and with internal hexagonal connection. The average marginal bone loss around the implants was evaluated on the basis of the panoramic radiographs. The maximum follow-up period after implantation was 46 months. The peri-implant marginal bone loss was evaluated taking into consideration the implant localisation, the procedure of sinus lift with bone augmentation, implant type, implant diameter, vertical implant position relative t...
The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants
Control over marginal bone loss (MBL) and its progression is critical for preserving peri-implant tissue health. A moderate MBL over the first year has conventionally been associated with clinical success. However, different implants are associated with distinct amounts of MBL during their first functional year. Therefore, this study evaluated the MBL in pristine maxillary bone around implants with different types of implant-abutment connections and sought to determine the effect of other clinical factors on this tissue response. Two hundred forty-six implants were placed in 101 patients with a mean age of 54.43 years. The MBL around two different types of implants (internal versus external prosthetic connection) was evaluated at 6 and 18 months after loading. Different variables were recorded to analyze their influence on radiographic parameters using a complex samples general linear model. At 18 months, MBL ranged from 0 to 3.56 mm; less than 1 mm was lost around 46.3% (mesial) an...
Marginal bone loss as success criterion in implant dentistry: beyond 2 mm
Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2014
Aim: The aim of this study was to analyze marginal bone loss (MBL) rates around implants to establish the difference between physiological bone loss and bone loss due to peri-implantitis. Materials and methods: Five hundred and eight implants were placed in the posterior maxilla in 208 patients. Data were gathered on age, gender, bone substratum (grafted or pristine), prosthetic connection, smoking and alcohol habits, and previous periodontitis. MBL was radiographically analyzed in three time frames (5 months post-surgery and at 6 and 18 months post-loading). Nonparametric receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis and mixed linear model analysis were used to determine whether implants could be classified as high or low bone loser type (BLT) and to establish the influence of this factor on MBL rates. Results: Marginal bone loss rates were significantly affected by BLT, connection type, bone substratum, and smoking. Bone loss rates at 18 months were associated with initial bone loss rates: 96% of implants with an MBL of >2 mm at 18 months had lost 0.44 mm or more at 6 months postloading. Conclusion: Implants with increased MBL rates at early stages (healing and immediate postloading periods) are likely to reach MBL values that compromise their final outcome. Initial (healing, immediate post-loading) MBL rates around an implant of more than 0.44 mm/year are an indication of peri-implant bone loss progression.
Dental and Medical Problems
Based on a review of topical literature, the paper presents the results of studies concerning marginal bone loss around dental implants. The paper provides a detailed description of the process of bone loss around dental implants with conical implant-abutment connection generally used in implant prosthetic treatment. The reviewed articles reported experimental studies involving animals, as well as clinical research in humans. The results concerning bone loss around the hexagonal implant-abutment interface are cited only to provide the historical background, as implants with internal connections are generally available and currently used in oral implantology. The research on bone loss around implants conducted over the years has allowed for the assessment of the relationships between various factors that may affect the process of bone loss around implants and, consequently, influence the final result of the treatment and therapeutic success. The researchers focused on the effect of such factors as: differences in implant structure, types of surfaces, shapes and materials. In addition, bone loss is dependent on prosthetic treatment: implants may be placed at different locations in the alveolar process bone and at different levels in the hard bone; open or closed methods of healing are used; types of prosthetic restorations loaded after implantation vary, as also varies the time from implantation to loading (early or late loading), types of cementing material and cementing techniques. The paper discusses also the presence of a microgap and its colonization by microorganisms as factors that negatively affect the process of osseointegration.
Factors Influencing Marginal Bone Loss around Dental Implants: A Narrative Review
Coatings, 2021
Implant supported dental prostheses are increasingly used in dental practice. The aim of this narrative review is to present the influence of transmucosal surface of prosthetic abutment and implant on peri-implant tissue. The article describes causes of bone loss around the dental implant. Moreover, properties of different materials are compared and discussed. The advantages, disadvantages, and biomechanical concept of different implant-abutment connections are presented. The location of connections in relation to the bone level and the influence of microgap between the abutment and implant are described. Additionally, the implant abutments for cemented and screwed prosthetic restorations are compared. The influence of implant and abutment surface at the transmucosal level on peri-implant soft tissue is discussed. Finally, the biological aspect of abutment-implant connection is analyzed.
Clinical oral implants research, 2016
The aim of this prospective clinical cohort study was to validate implant crowns with a novel Functional Implant Prosthodontic Score (FIPS). Twenty patients were restored with cement-retained crowns on soft tissue level implants (Institut Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland) in posterior sites and annually followed-up for 3 years. FIPS was applied for the objective outcome assessment including clinical and radiographic examinations. Five variables were defined for evaluation, resulting in a maximum score of 10 per implant restoration. The patients' level of satisfaction was recorded and correlated with FIPS. All implants and connected crowns revealed survival rates of 100% without any biological or technical complications after three years of loading. The mean total FIPS score was 7.8 ± 1.5, ranging from 6 to 10. The variable "bone" revealed the highest scores (2 ± 0; range: 2-2), followed by "occlusion" (1.9 ± 0.1; range: 1-2). Mean scores for "design"...
The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, 2013
Purpose: The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the predictors of peri-implant bone loss in a sample of patients treated with 10-mm implants and single crowns who underwent periodontal/periimplant maintenance (PM) in a Mexican private periodontal practice. Materials and Methods: Outcomes of a group of systemically healthy, partially edentulous patients attended up to July 2012 were assessed. Patient data were considered for inclusion if they involved treatment of partially edentulous sites with 10-mm-long implants and single crown restorations, as well as at least 3 years of regular PM following implant placement. Peri-implant bone loss was evaluated from data recorded at the most recent examination. Logistic regression analysis was performed to investigate associations between peri-implant bone loss and sex, duration of PM, location and number of implants placed per patient, region of the mouth, smoking status, type of implant, and retention of restoration. Results: A sample of 104 subjects who had been treated with four different types of dental implants and maintained for at least 3 years was selected. Of the 148 implants placed and followed for an average period of continuing PM of 6 years (range, 3 to 15 years), only one implant (1.8%) was lost. The outcomes of logistic regression analysis showed that the independent variables smoking, retention of restoration (cemented vs screw-retained), and type of implant (internal-or external-hex) were found to be correlated with peri-implant bone loss, with odds ratios of 39.64, 4.85, and 0.04, respectively. Conclusions: Peri-implant bone loss was significantly associated with smoking status, the type of implant (ie, externally hexed), and type of retention (ie, cemented). Overall, all patients maintained low rates of bone loss. Int J Oral
Clinical Oral Investigations, 2020
Objectives The aim of the present study was to investigate whether peri-implant clinical parameters (modified plaque index (mPI), bleeding and/or suppuration on probing (B/SOP)) and local factors (type of prostheses, screw emergence, platform diameter, and abutment angulation) might contribute to the development of additional bone loss and peri-implantitis around dental implants. Materials and methods Two hundred seventy-seven external hex connection implants placed in the posterior maxilla of 124 patients were retrospectively evaluated. They were divided into two groups: physiologic bone loss < 2 mm (PBL) or additional bone loss ≥ 2 mm (ABL). GEE logistic regression was applied to evaluate the influence of type of prostheses (implant-supported single crown (ISSC), fixed partial denture (ISFPD), and full denture (ISFD)) and clinical parameters (mPI and S/BOP) on bone loss. Results Among the 277 implants, 159 (57.4%) presented PBL and 118 (42.6%) presented ABL. Within the ABL grou...
Journal of Pre-Clinical and Clinical Research
Introduction. One of the criteria of implant therapy success is marginal bone loss. The objective of the study was to assess the correlation between peri-implant marginal bone loss and implant-abutment connection systems used in the same patient, as well as other specific characteristics of implant treatment. The initial research hypothesis assumed that there was no difference in marginal bone loss around implants with different implant-abutment connection systems placed in the same patient. Materials and method. Marginal bone loss was assessed around implants with two different types of implant-abutment connection: with conical (Type I) and with internal hexagonal (Type II) in the same patient. The study included 28 patients aged 37-66 years. Results. Marginal bone loss around Type I implants was 0.112 mm/month before loading with prosthetic restorations, and 0.010 mm/month after loading, while for Type II implants it reached, respectively, 0.123 mm/month and 0.030 mm/month. Marginal bone loss after loading with prosthetic restorations was 11 times lower for Type I implants and 4 times lower for Type II implants. Evaluation of marginal bone loss in the studied patient groups was made on the basis of orthopantomographic radiographs. Conclusions. Implants with conical implant-abutment connection are significantly more favourable to osseointegration than those with internal hexagonal connection. As marginal bone loss is faster before loading implants with prosthetic restorations than after loading, it is advisable to consider early loading if the necessary clinical conditions are met.