Inward-inclined implant platform for the amplified platform-switching concept: 18-month follow-up report of a prospective randomized matched-pair controlled trial.

PURPOSE This prospective randomized matched-pair controlled trial aimed to evaluate marginal bone levels and soft tissue alterations at implants restored according to the platform-switching concept with a new inward-inclined platform and compare them with external-hexagon implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS Traditional external-hexagon (control group) implants and inward-inclined platform implants (test group), all with the same implant body geometry and 13 mm in length, were inserted in a standardized manner in the posterior maxillae of 40 patients. Radiographic bone levels were measured by two independent examiners after 6, 12, and 18 months of prosthetic loading. Buccal soft tissue height was measured at the time of abutment connection and 18 months later. RESULTS After 18 months of loading, all 80 implants were clinically osseointegrated in the 40 participating patients. Radiographic evaluation showed mean bone losses of 0.5 ± 0.1 mm (range, 0.3 to 0.7 mm) and 1.6 ± 0.3 mm (range, 1.1 to 2.2 mm) for test and control implants, respectively. Soft tissue height showed a significant mean decrease of 2.4 mm in the control group, compared to 0.6 mm around the test implants. CONCLUSIONS After 18 months, significantly greater bone loss was observed at implants restored according to the conventional external-hexagon protocol compared to the platform-switching concept. In addition, decreased soft tissue height was associated with the external-hexagon implants versus the platform-switched implants.

[1]  J. Wennström,et al.  Tissue alterations at implant-supported single-tooth replacements: a 1-year prospective clinical study. , 2006, Clinical oral implants research.

[2]  Ameen Khraisat,et al.  Fatigue resistance of two implant/abutment joint designs. , 2002, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[3]  U. Häfeli,et al.  Evaluation of postsurgical crestal bone levels adjacent to non-submerged dental implants. , 1998, Clinical oral implants research.

[4]  M. Hallman,et al.  A three-year follow-up report of a comparative study of ITI Dental Implants and Brånemark System implants in the treatment of the partially edentulous maxilla. , 2004, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[5]  D. Di Iorio,et al.  Evaluation of peri-implant bone loss around platform-switched implants. , 2008, The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry.

[6]  T. Traini,et al.  Hard and soft tissue responses to the platform-switching technique. , 2008, The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry.

[7]  Richard J Lazzara,et al.  Platform switching: a new concept in implant dentistry for controlling postrestorative crestal bone levels. , 2006, The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry.

[8]  J. Radford,et al.  Double-blind randomized controlled trial study on post-extraction immediately restored implants using the switching platform concept: soft tissue response. Preliminary report , 2009, BDJ.

[9]  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.

[10]  Antonio Scarano,et al.  Crestal Bone Remodeling in Loaded and Unloaded Implants and the Microgap: A Histologic Study , 2003, Implant dentistry.

[11]  M. Hürzeler,et al.  Peri-implant bone level around implants with platform-switched abutments: preliminary data from a prospective study. , 2007, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[12]  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.

[13]  T. Linkevicius,et al.  Influence of abutment material on stability of peri-implant tissues: a systematic review. , 2008, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[14]  Simonas Grybauskas,et al.  Influence of thin mucosal tissues on crestal bone stability around implants with platform switching: a 1-year pilot study. , 2010, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[15]  Luigi Canullo,et al.  Platform switching and marginal bone-level alterations: the results of a randomized-controlled trial. , 2010, Clinical oral implants research.

[16]  Helen V Worthington,et al.  Interventions for replacing missing teeth: management of soft tissues for dental implants. , 2012, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

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

[18]  J. Lindhe,et al.  The mucosal barrier following abutment dis/reconnection. An experimental study in dogs. , 1997, Journal of clinical periodontology.

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

[20]  G. Rasperini,et al.  Preservation of peri-implant soft and hard tissues using platform switching of implants placed in immediate extraction sockets: a proof-of-concept study with 12- to 36-month follow-up. , 2007, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[21]  F. Schwarz,et al.  Influence of platform switching on crestal bone changes at non-submerged titanium implants: a histomorphometrical study in dogs. , 2007, Journal of clinical periodontology.

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

[23]  D Buser,et al.  Persistent Acute Inflammation at the Implant-Abutment Interface , 2003, Journal of dental research.

[24]  Paolo Vigolo,et al.  Platform-switched restorations on wide-diameter implants: a 5-year clinical prospective study. , 2009, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[25]  K. Nemoto,et al.  Influence of implant/abutment joint designs on abutment screw loosening in a dental implant system. , 2005, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials.

[26]  Yoshinobu Maeda,et al.  Biomechanical analysis on platform switching: is there any biomechanical rationale? , 2007, Clinical oral implants research.

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

[28]  George A. Zarb,et al.  Criteria for success of osseointegrated endosseous implants. , 1989 .

[29]  Xavier Rodríguez-Ciurana,et al.  Benefits of an Implant Platform Modification Technique to Reduce Crestal Bone Resorption , 2006, Implant dentistry.

[30]  Fernando Zarone,et al.  A randomized prospective multicenter trial evaluating the platform-switching technique for the prevention of postrestorative crestal bone loss. , 2009, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

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

[32]  A. Piattelli,et al.  Immediately loaded titanium implant with a tissue-stabilizing/maintaining design ('beyond platform switch') retrieved from man after 4 weeks: a histological and histomorphometrical evaluation. A case report. , 2008, Clinical oral implants research.

[33]  L. Canullo,et al.  Short-term bone level observations associated with platform switching in immediately placed and restored single maxillary implants: a preliminary report. , 2009, The International journal of prosthodontics.

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

[35]  M. Manz.  Factors associated with radiographic vertical bone loss around implants placed in a clinical study. , 2000, Annals of periodontology.

[36]  L. McManus,et al.  Peri-implant Inflammation Defined by the Implant-Abutment Interface , 2006, Journal of dental research.

[37]  D. Cochran,et al.  Influence of the size of the microgap on crestal bone levels in non-submerged dental implants: a radiographic study in the canine mandible. , 2002, Journal of periodontology.

[38]  D. Cochran,et al.  Biologic Width around one- and two-piece titanium implants. , 2001, Clinical oral implants research.

[39]  R. Delgado-Ruiz,et al.  Immediate maxillary restoration of single-tooth implants using platform switching for crestal bone preservation: a 12-month study. , 2009, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[40]  E. Richter,et al.  Influence of microgap location and configuration on the periimplant bone morphology in submerged implants. An experimental study in dogs. , 2008, Clinical oral implants research.

[41]  D Buser,et al.  Biologic width around titanium implants. A physiologically formed and stable dimension over time. , 2000, Clinical oral implants research.

[42]  S. Froum,et al.  Effect of maxillary sinus augmentation on the survival of endosseous dental implants. A systematic review. , 2003, Annals of periodontology.

[43]  Heoung-Jae Chun,et al.  Influence of implant abutment type on stress distribution in bone under various loading conditions using finite element analysis. , 2006, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[44]  Luigi Canullo,et al.  Double-blind randomized controlled trial study on post-extraction immediately restored implants using the switching platform concept: soft tissue response. Preliminary report. , 2009, Clinical oral implants research.