scholarly journals Maryland Bridge to prevent crestal bone loss during peri-implant healing phases- 6-month RCT

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. 112-112
Author(s):  
Fausto Zamparini ◽  
Arash Azizi ◽  
Stefano Chersoni ◽  
Andrea Spinelli ◽  
Maria Giovanna Gandolfi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Loss ◽  
Crestal Bone Loss

Survival of Short and Ultra-Short Locking-Taper Implants Supporting Single Crowns in the Posterior Mandible: A 3-Year Retrospective Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 396-406 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giorgio Lombardo ◽  
Annarita Signoriello ◽  
Miguel Simancas-Pallares ◽  
Mauro Marincola ◽  
Pier Francesco Nocini
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Bone Loss ◽  
Contact Point ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Point Position ◽  
Crestal Bone Loss ◽  
Short Implants ◽  
Single Crown ◽  
Bone To Implant Contact ◽  
Single Crowns

The purpose of this retrospective study was to determine survival and peri-implant marginal bone loss of short and ultra-short implants placed in the posterior mandible. A total of 98 patients received 201 locking-taper implants between January 2014 and January 2015. Implants were placed with a 2-stage approach and restored with single crowns. Clinical and radiographic examinations were performed at 3-year recall appointments. At that time, the proportion of implant survival by length, and variations of crestal bone levels (mean crestal bone loss and mean apical shift of the “first bone-to-implant contact point” position) were assessed. Significance level was set at 0.05. The total number of implants examined 36 months after loading included: 71 implants, 8.0 mm in length; 82 implants, 6.0 mm in length; and 48 implants, 5.0 mm in length. Five implants failed. The overall proportion of survival was 97.51%, with 98.59% for the 8.0-mm implants, 97.56% for the 6.0-mm implants, and 95.83% for the 5.0-mm implants. No statistically significant differences were found among the groups regarding implant survival (P = .73), mean crestal bone loss (P = .31), or mean apical shift of the “first bone-to-implant contact point” position (P = .36). Single-crown short and ultra-short implants may offer predictable outcomes in the atrophic posterior mandibular regions, though further investigations with longer follow-up evaluations are necessary to validate our results.

scholarly journals Peri-Implant Crestal Bone Loss: A Putative Mechanism

2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuko Ujiie ◽  
Reynaldo Todescan ◽  
John E. Davies
Keyword(s):  
Bone Loss ◽  
Stromal Cells ◽  
Cell Types ◽  
Osteoclast Formation ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Crestal Bone Loss ◽  
Bacterial Endotoxins ◽  
Immunological Mechanisms ◽  
Study Support ◽  
Putative Mechanism

Purpose. The immunological mechanisms of peri-implant crestal bone loss have, hitherto, not been elucidated. We hypothesized that bacterial products from the microgap cause upregulation of cytokines in otherwise healthy peri-implant cells, which results in osteoclast formation and, ultimately, in bone resorption.Materials and Methods. We used RT-PCR and ELISA to assay mediators of osteoclastogenesis in rat and human macrophages (r-and hMO); bone marrow derived stromal cells (r-and hBMCs); and human gingival fibroblasts (hGF)—with or without stimulation by LPS. TRAP positive multinucleate cells were assessed for their resorptive ability.Results. We show that IL-1α, IL-1β, and IL-6 were expressed by all examined cell types, and TNF-αwas upregulated in hGF. Secretion of IL-1αand IL-1βproteins was stimulated in hMO by LPS, and IL-6 protein secretion was highly stimulated in hBMCs and hGF. Both LPS and RANKL stimulated macrophages to form osteoclast-like TRAP positive cells, which resorbed calcium phosphate substrates.Conclusion. Taken together, the results of our study support the hypothesis that bacterial endotoxins upregulate enhanced mediators of osteoclastogenesis in resident cells found in the healthy peri-implant compartment and that the local synergistic action of cytokines secreted by such cells results in the genesis of resorptively active osteoclasts.

Influence of Apico-Coronal Implant Placement on Post-Surgical Crestal Bone Loss in Humans

2017 ◽  
Vol 88 (8) ◽  
pp. 762-770 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlo Ercoli ◽  
Georges Jammal ◽  
Madeline Buyers ◽  
Alexandra Athanasiou Tsigarida ◽  
Konstantinos Michail Chochlidakis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Loss ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Crestal Bone Loss

COMPARISON OF TWO DIFFERENT IMPLANT SITE PREPARATION TECHNIQUES: PIEZOSURGERY VS STANDARD DRILLING

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 201-205
Author(s):  
Abdulla Varoneckas ◽  
Rokas Poška ◽  
Rokas Gelažius
Keyword(s):  
Bone Loss ◽  
Success Rate ◽  
Primary Stability ◽  
Site Preparation ◽  
Bone Diseases ◽  
Osteotomy Site ◽  
Metabolic Bone Diseases ◽  
Dental Implantation ◽  
Crestal Bone Loss ◽  
Secondary Stability

Relevance of the problem. Over the years, dental implant placement has proven to be a routine and reliable procedure. Osteotomy site preparation has a significant impact on implantation success rate. Surgery using piezosurgery is used as an alternative method for osteotomy. Piezosurgery concept has proven to reduce mechanical and thermal tissue trauma. Aim. Compare clinical differences between piezosurgery (PS) and standard drilling (SD) in dental implantation. Materials and methods: A systematic review was based on the PRISMA guidelines. Search was carried out in electronic databases. Researched studies were observational, published less than 10 years ago, in English. Studies that involved immediate implantation or bone augmentation were excluded, as well as patients with metabolic bone diseases or using bisphosphonate therapy. Results. Regarding crestal bone loss, 3 out of 4 articles stated that there were no statistically significant differences between standard drilling and piezosurgery group. One study, however, disclosed that piezosurgery showed better preservation of crestal bone after 3 years. 5 studies measured primary stability and did not find any significant differences. Secondary stability, however, was significantly higher in the piezosurgery group at 2nd and 3rd months. 5 studies that measured the duration of surgeries reported longer osteotomy time for the piezosurgery group. Pain level on VAS scale, oppositely, was lower in piezosurgery group. Conclusion. In conclusion, piezosurgery can be considered as an alternative to standard drilling. In terms of success rate, crestal bone loss and primary stability, results seem to be very similar in both groups. Piezosurgery, although, seems to be advantageous achieving secondary stability and maintaining lower pain levels during the healing process.

scholarly journals Evaluation of crestal bone resorption around cylindrical and conical implants following 6 months of loading: A randomized clinical trial

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (03) ◽  
pp. 317-322 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naser Sargolzaie ◽  
Hamid Reza Arab ◽  
Marzieh Mohammadi Moghaddam
Keyword(s):  
Bone Loss ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Pocket Depth ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Crestal Bone Loss ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Chi Square Test ◽  
Male Patients ◽  
Maxilla And Mandible

ABSTRACT Objective: The purpose of this clinical study was to evaluate the effect of implant body form (cylindrical and conical implants) on crestal bone levels during 6 months' follow-up after loading. Materials and Methods: A total of 32 SPI implants (19 conical implants/13 cylindrical implants) were randomly placed in 12 male patients using a submerged approach. None of the patients had compromising medical conditions or parafunctional habits. Periapical radiographs using the parallel technique were taken after clinical loading and 6 months later. Clinical indices including pocket depth and bleeding on probing (BOP) were recorded on 6-month follow-up. Data were analyzed by independent samples t-test and Chi-square test with a significance level of 0.05. Results: Six months after loading, crestal bone loss was 0.84 (±0.29) mm around the cylindrical implants and 0.73 (±0.62) mm around the conical types, which was not significantly different (P = 0.54). Pocket depth around the cylindrical and conical implants was 2.61 (±0.45) mm and 2.36 (±0.44) mm, respectively (P = 0.13). BOP was observed among 53.8% and 47.4% of the cylindrical implants and conical (P = 0.13). Bone loss and pocket depth in the maxilla and mandible had no significant difference (P = 0.46 and P = 0.09, respectively). Conclusion: In this study, although bone loss and clinical parameters were slightly higher in the cylindrical implants, there was no significant difference between the conical- and cylindrical-shaped implants.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document