Comparative Study of the Early Loading of Resorbable Blasting Media and Sandblasting with Large-grit and Acid-etching Surface Implants: A Retrospective Cohort Study원문보기
Purpose: This study compares the prognosis (the survival rate and marginal bone loss) of resorbable blasting media (RBM) surface implants and sandblasting with large-grit and acid-etching (SLA) surface implants in the early loading. Methods: This study targeted 123 patients treated by implants insta...
Purpose: This study compares the prognosis (the survival rate and marginal bone loss) of resorbable blasting media (RBM) surface implants and sandblasting with large-grit and acid-etching (SLA) surface implants in the early loading. Methods: This study targeted 123 patients treated by implants installation from January 2008 to March 2010. The loading was initiated in the maxilla within three to four months and in the mandible within one to two months. The types of restoration were single crown and fixed partial prosthesis. Those functioned over one year. The implants were classified by the surface of implants as Group 1: RBM surface (GS III; OSSTEM, Busan, Korea) and, Group 2: SLA surface (Superline; Dentium, Seoul, Korea). The groups were categorized by maxilla and mandible and compared by survival rate, marginal bone loss through clinical records evaluation, and radiographic measurements. Results: The marginal bone loss in the maxilla was $0.14{\pm}0.34mm$ (Group 1) and $0.30{\pm}0.37mm$ (Group 2), a statistically significant difference (P<0.05). In the mandible those were $0.28{\pm}0.54mm$ (Group 1) and $0.20{\pm}0.33mm$ (Group 2), not significant (P>0.05). There was no significant difference of marginal bone loss between maxilla and mandible by groups. During observation there was no implant failure, a survival rate of 100%. Conclusion: Both surfaces showed an excellent survival rate, and the marginal bone loss was not substantial.
Purpose: This study compares the prognosis (the survival rate and marginal bone loss) of resorbable blasting media (RBM) surface implants and sandblasting with large-grit and acid-etching (SLA) surface implants in the early loading. Methods: This study targeted 123 patients treated by implants installation from January 2008 to March 2010. The loading was initiated in the maxilla within three to four months and in the mandible within one to two months. The types of restoration were single crown and fixed partial prosthesis. Those functioned over one year. The implants were classified by the surface of implants as Group 1: RBM surface (GS III; OSSTEM, Busan, Korea) and, Group 2: SLA surface (Superline; Dentium, Seoul, Korea). The groups were categorized by maxilla and mandible and compared by survival rate, marginal bone loss through clinical records evaluation, and radiographic measurements. Results: The marginal bone loss in the maxilla was $0.14{\pm}0.34mm$ (Group 1) and $0.30{\pm}0.37mm$ (Group 2), a statistically significant difference (P<0.05). In the mandible those were $0.28{\pm}0.54mm$ (Group 1) and $0.20{\pm}0.33mm$ (Group 2), not significant (P>0.05). There was no significant difference of marginal bone loss between maxilla and mandible by groups. During observation there was no implant failure, a survival rate of 100%. Conclusion: Both surfaces showed an excellent survival rate, and the marginal bone loss was not substantial.
* AI 자동 식별 결과로 적합하지 않은 문장이 있을 수 있으니, 이용에 유의하시기 바랍니다.
제안 방법
Analysis of the medical records and measurements on radiographs, the implant survival rate and the marginal bone loss between the maxilla and the mandible were evaluated along with the implant system.
88 months for the mandible. During the first year post-treatment, exams was performed at three month intervals, then lengthened to six month intervals thereafter.
The marginal bone loss was measured by comparing the marginal bone level around the implant fixture on the periapical radiograph taken at initial implant installation with those of the final follow-up radiograph. For the marginal bone loss, bone height from the implant shoulder to the most distinct radio-opaque area in the mesiodistal alveolar ridge was measured vertically on the radiograph taken by the parallel imaging method and the average was calculated by obtaining the mesiodistal height.
The subjects were divided by implant surface treatment into Group 1: RBM surface (GS III; OSSTEM, Busan, Korea) and Group 2: SLA surface (Superline; Dentium, Seoul, Korea) (Fig. 1). Both the GS III and Superline system were of the internal hex and tapered body type.
This study compared the survival rate and marginal bone loss of the early loading of RBM surface implants and that of SLA surface implants.
대상 데이터
The Superline implants used in this study were of the SLA surface and tapered type. These are designed to be placed in cases with poor bone quality or in cases with a bone graft in the maxillary sinus.
The study included patients who were loaded three to four months after implant placement in the maxilla and one to two months after implant placement in the mandible at the Bundang Seoul National University Dental Clinic from January 2008 to March 2010. The informed consents for this study were explained to the patients before treatment.
데이터처리
The mean bone resorption level of the two groups was compared by Student’s t-test.
The survival rate and success rate of implants for the two groups were compared by the Pearson’s chi-square test.
성능/효과
There was a 100% survival rate of the implants in both groups. For the maxilla, the success rate was 98% for Group 1 and 97% for Group 2. For the mandible, the success rate was 97% in Group 1 and 100% in Group 2 (Table 5), not a significant difference in the survival rate and success rate.
2. The mean age of the subjects for the evaluation of the maxilla was 54.29±12.64 years, and the mean age of the subjects for the evaluation of the mandible was 54.92±13.00 years.
3. In the maxilla, the marginal bone loss around implants was 0.14±0.34 mm in Group 1 and 0.30±0.37 mm in Group 2, and a statistically significant difference between groups was found (P＜0.05).
[6] reported the marginal bone loss of fixed prostheses supported by ITI SLA screw type implants and placed within 24 hours in 28 patients with edentulous maxilla. Eight months after function, there was an average marginal bone loss of 3.2mm, and the survival rate was 98%. Nordin et al.
The limitations of this retrospective study are that the deviation of cases in the anterior tooth and posterior tooth was large, the length and diameter of implants were diverse, and the variables of bone mass and bone quality were not considered. Despite such limitations, the early loading protocol, in which the final prosthesis was placed at 3 to 4 months in the maxilla and 1 to 2 months in the mandible, yielded stable clinical outcomes.
[7] reported on SLA Straumann implants of 116 patients that were placed in maxillae and restored with a fixed implant-supported prosthesis within 10 to 14 days. The patients were observed for two to three years, and achieved a 98% success rate. Roccuzzo et al.
참고문헌 (25)
1. Albrektsson T Brånemark PI Hansson HA Lindström J Osseointegrated titanium implants. Requirements for ensuring a long-lasting, direct bone-to-implant anchorage in man Acta Orthop Scand 1981 52 155 70 7246093
3. Brånemark PI Hansson BO Adell R Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10-year period Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Suppl 1977 16 1 132 356184
4. Lee SY Kim YK Yun PY Yi YJ Yeo IS Retrospective Clinical study of immediate or early loading of implants J Korean Dent Assoc 2010 48 119 26
5. Kwon MJ Yeo IS Kim YK Yi YJ Yang JH Use of separate single-tooth implant restorations to replace two or more consecutive posterior teeth: a prospective cohort study for up to 1 year J Adv Prosthodont 2010 2 54 7 21165189
6. Bergkvist G Sahlholm S Karlsson U Nilner K Lindh C Immediately loaded implants supporting fixed prostheses in the edentulous maxilla: a preliminary clinical and radiologic report Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2005 20 399 405 15973951
7. Nordin T Graf J Frykholm A Helldén L Early functional loading of sand-blasted and acid-etched (SLA) Straumann implants following immediate placement in maxillary extraction sockets. Clinical and radiographic result Clin Oral Implants Res 2007 18 441 51 17517056
8. Roccuzzo M Aglietta M Bunino M Bonino L Early loading of sandblasted and acid-etched implants: a randomized-controlled double-blind split-mouth study. Five-year results Clin Oral Implants Res 2008 19 148 52 18067598
9. Van de Velde T Collaert B De Bruyn H Immediate loading in the completely edentulous mandible: technical procedure and clinical results up to 3 years of functional loading Clin Oral Implants Res 2007 18 295 303 17386064
10. Cochran DL Morton D Weber HP Consensus statements and recommended clinical procedures regarding loading protocols for endosseous dental implants Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004 19 Suppl 109 13 15635951
11. Mazor Z Cohen DK Preliminary 3-dimensional surface texture measurement and early loading results with a micro-textured implant surface Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003 18 729 38 14579962
12. Hsu SH Liu BS Lin WH Chiang HC Huang SC Cheng SS Characterization and biocompatibility of a titanium dental implant with a laser irradiated and dual-acid etched surface Biomed Mater Eng 2007 17 53 68 17264387
13. Wennerberg A Albrektsson T Effects of titanium surface topography on bone integration: a systematic review Clin Oral Implants Res 2009 20 Suppl 4 172 84 19663964
14. Shalabi MM Gortemaker A Van’t Hof MA Jansen JA Creugers NH Implant surface roughness and bone healing: a systematic review J Dent Res 2006 85 496 500 16723643
15. Degidi M Piattelli A Shibli JA Perrotti V Iezzi G Bone formation around immediately loaded and submerged dental implants with a modified sandblasted and acid-etched surface after 4 and 8 weeks: a human histologic and histomorphometric analysis Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009 24 896 901 19865630
16. Esposito M Grusovin MG Willings M Coulthard P Worthington HV The effectiveness of immediate, early, and conventional loading of dental implants: a Cochrane systematic review of randomized controlled clinical trials Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007 22 893 904 18271370
17. Canullo L Sisti A Early implant loading after vertical ridge augmentation (VRA) using e-PTFE titanium-reinforced membrane and nano-structured hydroxyapatite: 2-year prospective study Eur J Oral Implantol 2010 3 59 69 20467599
19. Gedrange T Hietschold V Mai R Wolf P Nicklisch M Harzer W An evaluation of resonance frequency analysis for the determination of the primary stability of orthodontic palatal implants. A study in human cadavers Clin Oral Implants Res 2005 16 425 31 16117766
20. Makkonen TA Holmberg S Niemi L Olsson C Tammisalo T Peltola J A 5-year prospective clinical study of Astra Tech dental implants supporting fixed bridges or over-dentures in the edentulous mandible Clin Oral Implants Res 1997 8 469 75 9555206
21. Valderrama P Jones AA Wilson TG Jr Bone changes around early loaded chemically modified sandblasted and acid-etched surfaced implants with and without a machined collar: a radiographic and resonance frequency analysis in the canine mandible Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010 25 548 57 20556254
22. Bratu EA Tandlich M Shapira L A rough surface implant neck with microthreads reduces the amount of marginal bone loss: a prospective clinical study Clin Oral Implants Res 2009 20 827 32 19508341
23. Abrahamsson I Berglundh T Effects of different implant surfaces and designs on marginal bone-level alterations: a review Clin Oral Implants Res 2009 20 Suppl 4 207 15 19663966
24. Rossi F Ricci E Marchetti C Lang NP Botticelli D Early loading of single crowns supported by 6-mm-long implants with a moderately rough surface: a prospective 2-year follow-up cohort study Clin Oral Implants Res 2010 21 937 43 20701620
25. Albrektsson T Zarb G Worthington P Eriksson AR The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1986 1 11 25 3527955
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.