Search

Objective: The aim of this multicenter, randomized controlled trial was to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of 6‐mm or 11‐mm implants, placed in the posterior maxilla and mandible, during a 5‐year follow‐up period. Materials and methods: Ninety‐five patients with adequate bone height for 11‐mm implants, were randomly allocated to a 6‐mm group (test group with short implants) or an 11‐mm group (control group with standard‐length implants). Two or three implants of the same length were placed in each patient and after 6 weeks loaded with a splinted provisional restoration. This was followed by definitive splinted restoration 6 months after implant placement. Clinical and radiographic parameters, including the occurrence of complications were recorded. Results: A total of 49 patients were enrolled to receive 6‐mm implants (n = 108) and 46 patients to receive 11‐mm implants (n = 101). Three implants (two of 6 mm and one of 11 mm in length) were lost before loading and one 6‐mm implant after 15 months of function, and one 11‐mm implant was lost during the first year of function. The 5‐year survival rates were 96.0% and 98.9% in the 6‐mm and 11‐mm group, respectively. The mean marginal bone level changes 5 years post‐loading were 0.01 ± 0.45 mm (bone gain) in the 6‐mm group and −0.12 ± 0.93 mm (bone loss) in the 11‐mm group (p =.7670). Clinical parameters, including plaque, bleeding on probing and pocket probing depth were not significantly different between the groups, and also technical complications were low. Conclusion: The clinical and radiographic outcomes of 6‐mm short and 11‐mm standard‐length implants were not different during a 5‐year evaluation period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose To evaluate the relationship between defects of the facial socket wall at extraction and dimensional changes 8 weeks later in maxillary central and lateral incisor sockets. Materials and methods A total of 34 consecutive patients requiring single tooth implants in the anterior maxilla (27 central and 7 lateral incisors) were evaluated. Orofacial external ridge, bone dimensions and the location of the socket bone crest were measured at extraction and again 8.5 ± 2.91 weeks later. The status of the facial bone wall was recorded at the same time points. Results At extraction, 16 of 34 sites (47%) had intact facial bone. There were fenestration defects at 9 of 34 sites (26.5%) and dehiscence defects at 9 of 34 sites (26.5%). A significant reduction ( P < 0.001) in the external orofacial ridge dimension occurred (mesial 1.4 ± 1.30 mm or 12.1%, facial 2.5 ± 1.46 mm or 22.2%, distal 1.1 ± 0.83 mm or 10.5%), with greatest change at dehiscence (3.3 ± 1.80 mm or 28.4%) and fenestration sites (2.8 ± 1.40 mm or 24.9%). A significant reduction in orofacial bone dimension occurred (mesial 0.8 ± 0.80 mm or 9.3%, P < 0.001; facial 1.2 ± 1.03 mm or 18.3%, P < 0.001; distal 0.4 ± 0.65 mm or 5.5%, P < 0.01). Vertical resorption of the bone crest was most marked at the mid-facial aspect (1.4 ± 1.94 mm, P < 0.001). Initial fenestration defect sites demonstrated the greatest vertical dimensional change (2.9 ± 2.67 mm; P = 0.008). Of 16 sites with initially intact facial bone, 9 sites (56.3%) developed dehiscence defects after 8 weeks. Of the 9 initial sites with fenestration defects, 5 (55.6%) turned into dehiscence defects. All 9 sites with initial dehiscence defects healed with persistence of the dehiscence. Conclusions Eight weeks after flapless extraction of maxillary central and lateral incisors, a reduction in the orofacial dimensions of the ridge was observed due to resorption of the facial bone of the socket. Tooth type (maxillary central incisor) and thin tissue phenotype significantly influenced the outcomes. The dimensional alterations were most pronounced at sites that initially had fenestration and dehiscence defects of the facial bone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To evaluate the effect of submerged vs. non-submerged ( NS) protocols in healing outcomes of grafted marginal defects of immediate implants. Materials and methods The second maxillary incisors were extracted bilaterally in six greyhound dogs. Bone level reduced diameter implants were installed into the extraction sockets leaving orofacial gaps of 2 mm wide. Defects were filled with Bio-Oss® and covered with Bio-Gide®. On the one side, the flap was advanced to fully submerge the implant, and on the other, the flap was sutured to allow NS healing. After 3 months of healing, the dogs were sacrificed and block biopsies were obtained to perform histological and morphometric analysis. Results All implants were clinically healthy and well integrated into bone. In the majority of the specimens, the original bone in the coronal 2-3 mm of the buccal crest had completely resorbed and was replaced by a regenerated bone wall consisting of Bio-Oss® particles surrounded by newly formed bone. Horizontal and vertical resorption of the buccal bone resulted in ≥1 mm exposure of the implant surface in one-third of implants. Minor differences existed in some aspects of hard tissue healing between submerged and NS. Conclusion There was very little difference in healing outcomes as well as modelling of the facial bone wall between the submerged and NS protocols in relation to immediate implant placement in this dog model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]