Comparative Analysis of Peri‐Implant Marginal Bone Loss Based on Microthread Location: A 1‐Year Prospective Study After Loading
Authors:
- Dong‐Won LeeDLDong‐Won Lee
- Chong‐Kwan KimCKChong‐Kwan Kim
- Kwang‐Ho ParkKPKwang‐Ho Park
- Ik‐Sang MoonIMIk‐Sang Moon
- 1 December 2009
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Journal of Periodontology
- Vol. 80 (12) , 1937-1944
Abstract
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.Keywords
This publication has 31 references indexed in Scilit:
- Comparison of interproximal soft tissue height for single implants and contra-lateral natural teethClinical Oral Implants Research, 2009
- Bone Response to Loaded Implants With Non‐Matching Implant‐Abutment Diameters in the Canine MandibleJournal of Periodontology, 2009
- Commentary: Two‐Piece Implants With Turned Versus Microtextured CollarsJournal of Periodontology, 2007
- Dimension of Interproximal Soft Tissue Between Adjacent Implants in Two Distinctive Implant SystemsJournal of Periodontology, 2006
- Dimension of Keratinized Mucosa and the Interproximal Papilla Between Adjacent ImplantsJournal of Periodontology, 2005
- A computer‐assisted measurement technique to assess bone proximal to oral implants on intraoral radiographsClinical Oral Implants Research, 2001
- A Clinical, Radiographic, and Microbiologic Comparison of Astra Tech and Brånemark Single Tooth ImplantsClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 2000
- Single‐tooth replacement by osseointegrated Brånemark implants. A retrospective study of 82 implants.Clinical Oral Implants Research, 1995
- Predictable crestal bone remodelling around two porous‐coated titanium alloy dental implant designs. A radiographic study in dogs.Clinical Oral Implants Research, 1994
- Dental implant design–effect on bone remodelingJournal of Biomedical Materials Research, 1991