scholarly journals Factors Influencing Marginal Bone Loss around Dental Implants: A Narrative Review

Coatings ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. 865
Author(s):  
Jakub Kowalski ◽  
Barbara Lapinska ◽  
Joseph Nissan ◽  
Monika Lukomska-Szymanska
Keyword(s):  
Bone Loss ◽  
Narrative Review ◽  
Dental Practice ◽  
Marginal Bone Loss ◽  
Biological Aspect ◽  
Dental Prostheses ◽  
Factors Influencing ◽  
Implant Abutments ◽  
Implant Abutment ◽  
Bone Level

Implant supported dental prostheses are increasingly used in dental practice. The aim of this narrative review is to present the influence of transmucosal surface of prosthetic abutment and implant on peri-implant tissue. The article describes causes of bone loss around the dental implant. Moreover, properties of different materials are compared and discussed. The advantages, disadvantages, and biomechanical concept of different implant-abutment connections are presented. The location of connections in relation to the bone level and the influence of microgap between the abutment and implant are described. Additionally, the implant abutments for cemented and screwed prosthetic restorations are compared. The influence of implant and abutment surface at the transmucosal level on peri-implant soft tissue is discussed. Finally, the biological aspect of abutment-implant connection is analyzed.

scholarly journals Clinical outcomes of dental implants placed in the same region where previous implants failed due to peri-implantitis: a retrospective study

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eduardo Anitua ◽  
Adriana Montalvillo ◽  
Asier Eguia ◽  
Mohammad Hamdan Alkhraisat
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Bone Loss ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
High Survival ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Marginal Bone Loss ◽  
Bone Level

Abstract Purpose There is paucity in the studies that assess dental implants replacing failed dental implants due to peri-implantitis. This study aims to evaluate the clinical outcomes of these implants in terms of implant survival and marginal bone loss. Methods Patients in this retrospective study were selected if having one or more implants removed due to peri-implantitis and the placement and loading of dental implants in the same region from April 2010 to December 2019. Information was collected about the patient's demographic data, implant dimensions, surgical and prosthetic variables. Changes in peri-implant bone level, cumulative implant survival rate and technical complications were assessed. Results Three hundred and eighty one dental implants in 146 patients that were placed in the same position or one-tooth position mesially/distally to the site of explantation were included. The patients' mean age was 63 ± 10 years. Ninety seven patients were females and 49 were males. After a mean follow-up of 34 ± 17 months, two implants failed. The cumulative survival rate was 99%. The marginal bone loss was −0.1 ± 0.6. Immediate or delay replacement of the failed implant did not affect implant survival or marginal bone stability. All the prostheses were screw-retained and presented the following complications: ceramic chipping (3 events), resin tooth fracture (1 event) and prosthetic screw loosening (1 event). Conclusions Dental implants replacing failed implants due to peri-implantitis would be an option in the management of peri-implantitis. They showed high survival rate and marginal bone stability.

scholarly journals Clinical and Radiological Evaluation of Marginal Bone Loss around Dental Implants Restored with Zirconium vis-à-vis Porcelain Fused to Metal: An In Vivo Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 08 (01) ◽  
pp. 17-21
Author(s):  
Udey Singh Wirring ◽  
Tarun Kalra ◽  
Manjit Kumar ◽  
Ajay Bansal ◽  
Aquib Javaid
Keyword(s):  
Bone Loss ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Test Group ◽  
Radiographic Evaluation ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Marginal Bone Loss ◽  
Zirconia Crowns ◽  
Bone Level ◽  
The Difference

Abstract Introduction Marginal bone level is the criterion for implant success. Patient expectations for more natural looking implant restorations created the need to restore implants with more esthetically pleasing materials like Zirconia rather than conventional porcelain-fused to-metal (PFM) crowns. The aim of this study was to evaluate marginal bone loss around dental implants clinically and radiographically when restored with Zirconia and PFM prosthesis. Materials and Methods Two groups (control and test) were formed with 14 patients each. In the control group, the subjects were rehabilitated with PFM crowns and in the test group, the subjects were rehabilitated with Zirconia crowns. Rehabilitation was done after the healing period of 3 months. Radiographic evaluation was done at regular (baseline, 3rd, 6th, and 12th month) intervals. Results The results were statistically analyzed. Keeping in mind the limitations of the study, it was revealed that the difference in the crestal bone resorption in both the groups was not significant.

scholarly journals Effect of different implant‐abutment mismatch sizes on marginal bone loss ‐ prospective clinical trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (S19) ◽  
pp. 23-23
Author(s):  
Roberto Pessoa ◽  
Ravel Sousa ◽  
Leandro Pereira ◽  
Eduardo Emi Shah ◽  
Guilherme Oliveira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Bone Loss ◽  
Prospective Clinical Trial ◽  
Marginal Bone Loss ◽  
Implant Abutment

scholarly journals Does Implant-Abutment Interface affect Marginal Bone Levels around Implants?

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (01) ◽  
pp. 047-052 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eser Elemek ◽  
Artun Urgancioglu ◽  
Janberd Dincer ◽  
Altug Cilingir
Keyword(s):  
Bone Loss ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Marginal Bone Loss ◽  
Single Crown ◽  
Implant Abutment ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Switch Group

Abstract Objective The use of dental implants with different types of surface roughness and implant-abutment interface has brought about a situation of marginal bone loss. Therefore, the aim of this study was to analyze and compare marginal bone levels of different types of osseointegrated dental implants with platform switch (Group A: Ankylos, Mannheim, Germany) and platform match (Group B: Dentsply Xive, Mannheim, Germany, and Group C: MIS Implant Technologies, Karmiel, Israel). Materials and Methods One hundred and seven patients (52 men and 55 women) with a mean age of 54.79 (standard deviation ± 12.35) years and a total of 321 dental implants (Group A, n = 198; Group B, n = 58; and Group C, n = 65) placed in a private practice between April 2006 and May 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. In addition to demographic information and implant characteristics, marginal bone levels were evaluated by Image J (Wayne Rasband, National Institute of Health, Maryland) program. Results The mean age of all patients was 54.79 ± 12.35 years, and 51.5% of them were women. Implants supporting fixed bridge were most commonly used in all groups (65%), whereas only 20% were restored with a single crown and 15% with overdentures. In total, 47.5% of all implants showed no marginal bone loss. Mean bone loss in Group A was significantly lower (0.81 ± 1.60 mm) as compared to Group B (1.58 ± 1.59 mm) and Group C (1.18 ± 1.36) (p < 0.005). Conclusion Among different types of dental implants, platform switch seems to preserve marginal bone levels and increase the long-term success of dental implants.

scholarly journals Trends of Implant Placement in Relation to Crestal Bone Level in a Private Dental Institute

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (SPL3) ◽  
pp. 358-362
Author(s):  
Rinieshah Nair R Baskran ◽  
Rajendra Prabhu Abhinav ◽  
Murugaiyan Arun ◽  
Balaji Ganesh S
Keyword(s):  
Bone Loss ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
P Value ◽  
Marginal Bone Loss ◽  
Oral Rehabilitation ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Bone Level ◽  
Natural Dentition ◽  
Bone Height

Dental implants provide a strong foundation for fixed or removable prosthetic teeth that are made to match natural dentition. It has become an ideal method of oral rehabilitation after missing natural dentition has been recognised as a reliable tool for dental reconstruction and aesthetics. Marginal bone loss is characterized by a reduction in bone loss is characterized by a reduction in bone level both vertically and horizontally. The levels at which dental implants are placed include sub-crystal, equi-crestal, and supra-crestal. The crestal levels affect bone height significantly. Failure to do so will lead to peri-implant bone loss which will affect the implant function and ultimately implant failure. A retrospective study was conducted based on a university setting. 615 patients with 1141 implant sites were reviewed from June 2019 to March 2020. Excel tabulation and SPSS analysis were done for data analysis. There was a statistically significant difference between the variables that included tooth region, crestal relation and site (jaw)—[p-value<0.05] The most common crestal relation of implant placement is equi-crestal implant placement. The assessment of trends of implant placement in relation to crestal bone level shows that equi-crestal implant is the most preferred crestal relation of implant placement in Saveetha Dental College.

scholarly journals The Association of the One-Abutment at One-Time Concept with Marginal Bone Loss around the SLA and Platform Switch and Conical Abutment Implants

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 74
Author(s):  
Nasreen Hamudi ◽  
Eitan Barnea ◽  
Evgeny Weinberg ◽  
Amir Laviv ◽  
Eitan Mijiritsky ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Loss ◽  
Test Group ◽  
Mucosal Barrier ◽  
Control Group ◽  
X Rays ◽  
Marginal Bone Loss ◽  
Bone Level ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The One

Objectives: Repeated abutment disconnection/reconnection may compromise the mucosal barrier and result in crestal bone level changes. The clinical significance of this phenomenon is not yet clear, as most studies on this topic are short-term. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to evaluate the influence of abutment disconnections and reconnections on peri-implant marginal bone loss over a medium-term follow-up period. Material and methods: Twenty-one patients (6 men and 15 women) with a mean age 66.23 ± 9.35 year at the time of implant placement were included. All patients who received two adjacent nonsubmerged implants were randomly assigned into one of the two groups: definitive multiunit abutments (DEFs) connected to the implant that were not removed (test group) or healing abutments (HEAs) placed at surgery, which were disconnected and reconnected 3–5 times during the prosthetic phase (control group). Peri-implant marginal bone levels (MBL) were measured through periapical X-rays images acquired immediately after the surgery (baseline), at 4–7 months immediately after prosthetic delivery, and at 1-year and 3-year follow-up visits. Results: No implant was lost or presented bone loss of more than 1.9 mm during the 3-year follow-up; thus, the survival and success rate was 100%. Peri-implant mucositis was noticed in 38.1% DEFs and 41.9% of HEAs at the 3-year follow-up assessment. At the end of 3 years, the MBL was −0.35 ± 0.69 mm for participants in the DEFs group and −0.57 ± 0.80 mm for the HEAs group, with significant statistical difference between groups. Conclusions: Immediate connection of the multiunit abutments reduced bone loss in comparison with 3–5 disconnections noted in the healing abutments 3 years after prosthetic delivery. However, the difference between the groups was minimal; thus, the clinical relevance of those results is doubtful.

scholarly journals Influence of cervical crown contour on marginal bone loss around platform‐switched bone‐level implants

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (S19) ◽  
pp. 359-359
Author(s):  
Diederik Hentenaar ◽  
Yvonne De Waal ◽  
Arie Jan Van Winkelhoff ◽  
Gerry Raghoebar ◽  
Henny Meijer
Keyword(s):  
Bone Loss ◽  
Marginal Bone Loss ◽  
Bone Level

scholarly journals Clinical outcomes of single implant supported crowns versus 3-unit implant-supported fixed dental prostheses in Dubai Health Authority: a retrospective study

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Hussain Alhammadi ◽  
Girvan Burnside ◽  
Alexander Milosevic
Keyword(s):  
Bone Loss ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Health Authority ◽  
Marginal Bone Loss ◽  
Dental Prostheses ◽  
Technical Complications ◽  
Fixed Dental Prostheses ◽  
One Year ◽  
Implant Loading ◽  
Single Implant

Abstract Background This study assessed retrospectively the clinical outcomes of single implant-supported crowns and implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs). Methods This case series compared biological and technical complications in single implant-supported crowns and implant-supported bridges in a time framed sample of all patients who received dental implants between 2009 and 2016 in Dubai Health Authority. Only 3-unit implant-supported prostheses (FDPs) with one intervening pontic and an implant each end were included for comparison to single crown supported implants. Cantilevered implants, implant-supported dentures and cases involving bone grafts or sinus lifts were excluded. The primary outcome measure was marginal bone loss, measured on digital radiographs taken after prosthesis placement at baseline and one year after implant loading, whilst peri-implantitis and technical complications were secondary outcomes. Mixed regression models adjusted for clustering of implants within patients was used for patient and implant factor associations. Results A total of 454 patients (152 males; 302 females) had 1673 implants. The mean age of males (53.7 years, SD 14.6) was significantly greater than females (49.3 years, SD 12.9, p < 0.001). Mean mesial bone loss on the FDPs was significantly greater at 1 year (1.14 mm, SD 0.63) compared with the mesial surface of single implant-supported crowns (0.30 mm, SD 0.43, p < 0.001). Mean distal bone loss was also significantly greater at 1 year on the distal surfaces of implants supporting bridgework (1.29 mm, SD 0.71) compared with distal surfaces on single implant-supported crowns (0.36 mm, SD 0.54, p < 0.001). Mean marginal bone loss mesially and distally around implants placed in the lower anterior sextant was significantly greater compared to all other sites (p < 0.001). Bone loss by gender, patient’s age and medical condition was not different between the 2 implant groups. Screw loosening was the main technical complication (11.5%) whilst peri-implantitis occurred rarely (0.5%). The 66 cement retained implants had significantly more complications compared to the 1607 screw retained implants (p < 0.001). Conclusions Mean marginal bone loss around the supporting implants of FDPs (3-unit fixed bridgework) was greater than on single implant-supported crowns at one year after implant loading. Position in the mouth was associated with bone loss. Biological and technical complications occurred rarely.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document