Dataset Information

Dental Implants with Different Neck Design: A Prospective Clinical Comparative Study with 2-Year Follow-Up.

ABSTRACT: The present study was conducted to investigate whether a different implant neck design could affect survival rate and peri-implant tissue health in a cohort of disease-free partially edentulous patients in the molar-premolar region. The investigation was conducted on 122 dental implants inserted in 97 patients divided into two groups: Group A (rough wide-neck implants) vs. Group B (rough reduced-neck implants). All patients were monitored through clinical and radiological checkups. Survival rate, probing depth, and marginal bone loss were assessed at 12- and 24-month follow-ups. Patients assigned to Group A received 59 implants, while patients assigned to Group B 63. Dental implants were placed by following a delayed loading protocol, and cemented metal-ceramic crowns were delivered to the patients. The survival rates for both Group A and B were acceptable and similar at the two-year follow-up (96.61% vs. 95.82%). Probing depth and marginal bone loss tended to increase over time (follow-up: t1 = 12 vs. t2 = 24 months) in both groups of patients. Probing depth (p = 0.015) and bone loss (p = 0.001) were significantly lower in Group A (3.01 vs. 3.23 mm and .92 vs. 1.06 mm; Group A vs. Group B). Within the limitations of the present study, patients with rough wide-neck implants showed less marginal bone loss and minor probing depth, as compared to rough reduced-neck implants placed in the molar-premolar region. These results might be further replicated through longer-term trials, as well as comparisons between more collar configurations (e.g., straight vs. reduced vs. wide collars).

SUBMITTER: Montemezzi P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7084739 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Dental Implants with Different Neck Design: A Prospective Clinical Comparative Study with 2-Year Follow-Up.

Montemezzi Pietro P Ferrini Francesco F Pantaleo Giuseppe G Gherlone Enrico E Capparè Paolo P

Materials (Basel, Switzerland) 20200225 5

The present study was conducted to investigate whether a different implant neck design could affect survival rate and peri-implant tissue health in a cohort of disease-free partially edentulous patients in the molar-premolar region. The investigation was conducted on 122 dental implants inserted in 97 patients divided into two groups: Group A (rough wide-neck implants) vs. Group B (rough reduced-neck implants). All patients were monitored through clinical and radiological checkups. Survival rate ...[more]

PMID: 32106401

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Traditionally, dental implants have been made from titanium or titanium alloys. Alternatively, zirconia-based ceramic implants have been developed with similar characteristics of functional strength and osseointegration. Ceramic implants offer advantages in certain settings, e.g. in patients who object to metal dental implants. The aim of this study was to investigate the mid-term (36 months) clinical performance of a ceramic monotype implant in single-tooth edentulous area. METHODS:This was a prospective, open-label, single-arm study in patients requiring implant rehabilitation in single-tooth edentulous area. Ceramic implants (PURE Ceramic Implant, Institut Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland) with a diameter of 4.1 mm were placed following standard procedure and loaded with provisional and final prostheses after 3 and 6 months, respectively. Implant survival rate and implant success rate were evaluated and crestal bone levels were measured by analysing standardized radiographs during implant surgery and at 6, 12, 24 and 36 months. RESULTS:Forty-four patients received a study implant, of whom one patient withdrew consent after 3 months. With one implant lost during the first 6 months after surgery, the implant survival rate was 97.7% at 6 months. No further implants were lost over the following 30 months, and 3 patients were lost to follow-up during this time frame. This led to a survival rate of 97.5% at 36 months. Six months after implant surgery 93.0% of the implants were considered "successful", increasing to 97.6% at 12 months and remaining at this level at 24 months (95.1%) and 36 months (97.5%). Bone loss was most pronounced in the first half-year after implant surgery (0.88?±?0.86 mm). By contrast, between 12 and 36 months the mean bone level remained stable (minimal gain of 0.06 [± 0.60] mm). Hence, the overall bone loss from implant surgery to 36 months was 0.97 (± 0.88) mm. CONCLUSIONS:In the follow-up period ceramic implants can achieve favourable clinical outcomes on a par with titanium implants. For instance, these implants can be recommended for patients who object to metal dental implants. However, longer term studies with different edentulous morphology need to confirm the present data. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Registered on www.clinicaltrials.gov : NCT02163395 .

Project description:Proper horizontal and vertical thickness of the gingival connective tissue has been proven to be one of the success criteria in dental implant and reconstructive surgery. When thin tissue is found, gingiva augmentation methods can be used to increase the quality and volume of the tissue. Many methods have been described, among them pedicle soft-tissue flaps or autogenic tissue grafts. As an alternative to patients' own tissue, xenogenic materials can be used for grafting. The fundamental issue is to choose a material that will ensure the maximum therapeutic effect, while also minimizing the negative influence on the patient's health. The aim of this study was to compare gingival augmentation procedures using a palatal connective tissue graft (CTG) and an xenogenic soft-tissue substitute, Geistlich Mucograft (xenogeneic collagen matrix; CMX), and assess whether the timing of the graft surgery influences the clinical outcomes. The original study was a randomized control trial with a total of 75 implants placed. The patients received the soft-tissue thickening 3 months before the implant placement or 3 months after the implant placement (depending on the group). A connective tissue graft (CTG) or Geistlich Mucograft were used (depending on the group). For both the CTG and Geistlich Mucograft, better clinical outcomes were observed for maintaining the alveolar bone level and the thickness of the attached gingiva compared to the control group with no gingival augmentation. The Geistlich Mucograft showed good clinical performance in comparison to the control. Soft-tissue augmentation with the CTG before the implant placement was found to be most efficient method in terms of a stable increase of the tissue thickness since, throughout the entire observation period, the greatest increase of 1.035 mm (SD = 0.73 mm) in thickness was observed. Statistically important differences in the tissue thickness baseline compared after 5 years were observed for groups G1 vs. G2b (no augmentation vs. CTG before), G1 vs. G3b (no augmentation vs. CTG after) and for groups G2b vs. G3a (CTG before vs. CMX after).

Project description:There have been few prospective controlled studies of kidney donors. Understanding the pathophysiologic effects of kidney donation is important for judging donor safety and improving our understanding of the consequences of reduced kidney function in chronic kidney disease.Prospective, controlled, observational cohort study.3-year follow-up of kidney donors and paired controls suitable for donation at their donor's center.Kidney donation.Medical history, vital signs, glomerular filtration rate, and other measurements at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months after donation.At 36 months, 182 of 203 (89.7%) original donors and 173 of 201 (86.1%) original controls continue to participate in follow-up visits. The linear slope of the glomerular filtration rate measured by plasma iohexol clearance declined 0.36±7.55mL/min per year in 194 controls, but increased 1.47±5.02mL/min per year in 198 donors (P=0.005) between 6 and 36 months. Blood pressure was not different between donors and controls at any visit, and at 36 months, all 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure parameters were similar in 126 controls and 135 donors (mean systolic blood pressure, 120.0±11.2 [SD] vs 120.7±9.7mmHg [P=0.6]; mean diastolic blood pressure, 73.4±7.0 vs 74.5±6.5mmHg [P=0.2]). Mean arterial pressure nocturnal dipping was manifest in 11.2% ± 6.6% of controls and 11.3% ± 6.1% of donors (P=0.9). Urinary protein-creatinine and albumin-creatinine ratios were not increased in donors compared with controls. From 6 to 36 months postdonation, serum parathyroid hormone, uric acid, homocysteine, and potassium levels were higher, whereas hemoglobin levels were lower, in donors compared with controls.Possible bias resulting from an inability to select controls screened to be as healthy as donors, short follow-up duration, and dropouts.Kidney donors manifest several of the findings of mild chronic kidney disease. However, at 36 months after donation, kidney function continues to improve in donors, whereas controls have expected age-related declines in function.

Dataset Information

Dental Implants with Different Neck Design: A Prospective Clinical Comparative Study with 2-Year Follow-Up.

Publications

Dental Implants with Different Neck Design: A Prospective Clinical Comparative Study with 2-Year Follow-Up.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets