Comparative analysis of peri-implant marginal bone loss based on microthread location: a 1-year prospective study after loading.

BACKGROUND The purpose of the present study was to investigate the short-term effects of microthread location on peri-implant marginal bone levels. METHODS Two types of implants, one with microthreads placed at the implant top (group A) and the other with microthreads placed 0.5 mm below the implant top (group B), were placed adjacent to each other in the partially edentulous areas of 20 patients. In total, 40 implants were placed. Bone loss around each implant was analyzed after 1 year of functional loading, and gingival parameters (modified plaque index and modified sulcus bleeding index) of the peri-implant soft tissue were evaluated. Bone losses after loading and gingival parameters were compared using the paired t test. RESULTS The average bone loss was 0.16 (SD: 0.19) mm in group A and 0.30 (SD: 0.22) mm in group B after 1-year of functional loading. The paired t test revealed a significant difference in crestal bone loss between groups A and B in individual patients (P = 0.004). No significant differences were found between the two groups for the gingival parameters. CONCLUSIONS Less peri-implant bone loss was observed around implants with microthreads placed at the implant top (group A) compared to those in which microthreads were placed below the top (group B). These results indicated that the microthreads acted to stabilize the peri-implant marginal bone, and their locations played an important role in the stabilization process.

[1]  F. Isidor,et al.  Influence of forces on peri-implant bone. , 2006, Clinical oral implants research.

[2]  L. Rasmusson,et al.  Effects of implant design and surface on bone regeneration and implant stability: an experimental study in the dog mandible. , 2001, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[3]  J. Hirsch,et al.  Biological factors contributing to failures of osseointegrated oral implants. (I). Success criteria and epidemiology. , 1998, European journal of oral sciences.

[4]  N. Lang,et al.  The effect of subcrestal placement of the polished surface of ITI implants on marginal soft and hard tissues. , 1996, Clinical oral implants research.

[5]  B. Andersson.  Implants for single-tooth replacement. A clinical and experimental study on the Brånemark CeraOne System. , 1995, Swedish dental journal. Supplement.

[6]  C. Misch,et al.  The causes of early implant bone loss: myth or science? , 2002, Journal of periodontology.

[7]  C. Malevez,et al.  Marginal bone levels at Brånemark system implants used for single tooth restoration. The influence of implant design and anatomical region. , 1996, Clinical oral implants research.

[8]  H. Nilson,et al.  Single-tooth replacement by osseointegrated Brånemark implants. A retrospective study of 82 implants. , 1995, Clinical oral implants research.

[9]  N. Lang,et al.  The microbiota associated with successful or failing osseointegrated titanium implants. , 1987, Oral microbiology and immunology.

[10]  Dong-Won Lee,et al.  Non-invasive method to measure the length of soft tissue from the top of the papilla to the crestal bone. , 2005, Journal of periodontology.

[11]  R M Pilliar,et al.  Dental implant design--effect on bone remodeling. , 1991, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[12]  D Buser,et al.  Biologic width around titanium implants. A histometric analysis of the implanto-gingival junction around unloaded and loaded nonsubmerged implants in the canine mandible. , 1997, Journal of periodontology.

[13]  Dong-Won Lee,et al.  Effect of microthread on the maintenance of marginal bone level: a 3-year prospective study. , 2007, Clinical oral implants research.

[14]  J. Hirsch,et al.  Biological factors contributing to failures of osseointegrated oral implants. (II). Etiopathogenesis. , 1998, European journal of oral sciences.

[15]  C. Han,et al.  A 1-year radiographic evaluation of marginal bone around dental implants. , 1996, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[16]  Dong-Won Lee,et al.  Dimension of interproximal soft tissue between adjacent implants in two distinctive implant systems. , 2006, Journal of periodontology.

[17]  J. Lindhe,et al.  Dimension of the periimplant mucosa. Biological width revisited. , 1996, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[18]  R. Wilson,et al.  A clinical, radiographic, and microbiologic comparison of Astra Tech and Brånemark single tooth implants. , 2000, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[19]  L. Avivi-Arber,et al.  A computer-assisted measurement technique to assess bone proximal to oral implants on intraoral radiographs. , 2001, Clinical oral implants research.

[20]  W. Teughels,et al.  Effect of material characteristics and/or surface topography on biofilm development. , 2006, Clinical oral implants research.

[21]  S. Hansson,et al.  The implant neck: smooth or provided with retention elements. A biomechanical approach. , 1999, Clinical oral implants research.

[22]  Dong-Won Lee,et al.  Dimension of keratinized mucosa and the interproximal papilla between adjacent implants. , 2005, Journal of periodontology.

[23]  J. Wennström,et al.  The peri-implant hard and soft tissues at different implant systems. A comparative study in the dog. , 1996, Clinical oral implants research.

[24]  S. Hansson,et al.  Implant-abutment interface: biomechanical study of flat top versus conical. , 2000, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[25]  A A Caputo,et al.  Force transfer by osseointegration implant devices. , 1987, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[26]  Dong-Won Lee,et al.  Comparison of interproximal soft tissue height for single implants and contra-lateral natural teeth. , 2009, Clinical oral implants research.

[27]  D van Steenberghe,et al.  Fixture design and overload influence marginal bone loss and fixture success in the Brånemark system. , 1992, Clinical oral implants research.

[28]  Hans-Joachim Wilke,et al.  The influence of various titanium surfaces on the interface shear strength between implants and bone , 1991 .

[29]  K. Berhane,et al.  Predictable crestal bone remodelling around two porous-coated titanium alloy dental implant designs. A radiographic study in dogs. , 1994, Clinical oral implants research.

[30]  G Zarb,et al.  The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success. , 1986, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[31]  M. Norton,et al.  Marginal bone levels at single tooth implants with a conical fixture design. The influence of surface macro- and microstructure. , 1998, Clinical oral implants research.

[32]  R. Palmer,et al.  A 5-year prospective study of Astra single tooth implants. , 2000, Clinical oral implants research.

[33]  K. Gröndahl,et al.  Marginal bone reaction to oral implants: a prospective comparative study of Astra Tech and Brånemark System implants. , 2002, Clinical oral implants research.

[34]  R. Jung,et al.  Bone response to loaded implants with non-matching implant-abutment diameters in the canine mandible. , 2009, Journal of periodontology.

[35]  J. Cosyn,et al.  Two-piece implants with turned versus microtextured collars. , 2007, Journal of periodontology.

[36]  F. Isidor,et al.  Histological evaluation of peri-implant bone at implants subjected to occlusal overload or plaque accumulation. , 1997, Clinical oral implants research.

[37]  R. Jung,et al.  The influence of non-matching implant and abutment diameters on radiographic crestal bone levels in dogs. , 2008, Journal of periodontology.