» Articles » PMID: 22672713

Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Two Implants with Different Prosthetic Interfaces and Neck Configurations: Randomized, Controlled, Split-mouth Clinical Trial

Overview
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2012 Jun 8
PMID 22672713
Citations 18
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Peri-implant bone loss seems to occur following implant placement/loading regardless of all the efforts to eliminate it. Several factors, including surgical trauma, biologic width establishment, lack of passive fit of the superstructures, implant-abutment microgap, and occlusal overloading, may increase peri-implant bone loss. Over the years, new interface designs were introduced and clinical studies suggest that internal conical connection and platform shifting may be advantageous for marginal bone preservation.

Purpose: To compare clinical and radiological outcomes of two implant designs with different prosthetic interfaces and neck configurations in a randomized, controlled, split-mouth clinical trial.

Materials And Methods: Thirty-four partially edentate patients randomly received at least one internal conical connection with back-tapered collar and platform shifting design or external-hexagon implants with flat-to-flat implant-abutment interface. Primary end point was peri-implant bone level changes at different time points, failures of implants and/or prosthesis, any complications, implant stability quotient (ISQ) values, and periodontal parameters.

Results: No dropout occurred. Marginal bone changes were statistically significantly different with better results for the internal conical connection. No implants and prosthesis failures have been observed, yielding a cumulative survival rate of 100%. A high ISQ value was found for both implants, and no statistically significant difference was found for ISQ mean values between interventions at each time point (p > .05). All implants showed no bleeding on probing and a very slight amount of plaque at the 1-year-in-function visit.

Conclusions: Both implant designs investigated performed similarly in terms of failure rates, providing successful results up to 1 year after loading. The back-tapered neck configuration with conical connection and built-in platform shifting showed statistically lower marginal bone loss than straight neck configuration with flat-to-flat implant-abutment interface and external-hexagonal connection.

Citing Articles

The Influence of Patient-, Site-, and Implant-Related Factors on Marginal Bone Levels of Dental Implants in a Rural Population in China: A Retrospective Study.

Khehra A, Zanner O, Samet N, Levin L Clin Exp Dent Res. 2024; 10(6):e70045.

PMID: 39575753 PMC: 11582925. DOI: 10.1002/cre2.70045.


Evaluation of Internal and External Hexagon Connections in Immediately Loaded Full-Arch Rehabilitations: A Multicenter Randomized Split-Mouth Controlled Trial With a 6-Year Follow-Up.

Bagnasco F, Menini M, Pesce P, Gibello U, Carossa M, Pera F Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2024; 27(1):e13416.

PMID: 39506255 PMC: 11789837. DOI: 10.1111/cid.13416.


Marginal Bone Level and Clinical Parameter Analysis Comparing External Hexagon and Morse Taper Implants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Fuda S, Martins B, Castro F, Heboyan A, Gehrke S, Fernandes J Diagnostics (Basel). 2023; 13(9).

PMID: 37174979 PMC: 10178059. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13091587.


Effect of the implant apical exposure and coverage < or ≥ 2 mm bone graft on transcrestal sinus floor elevation: a 1- to 7-year retrospective cohort study.

Gao J, Zhao X, Man Y, Qu Y Clin Oral Investig. 2023; 27(7):3611-3626.

PMID: 37010635 DOI: 10.1007/s00784-023-04974-8.


Assessment of Clinical and Radiological Outcome of Implant with Two Different Connections Con iguration: A Controlled Trial.

Mangalvedhekar M, Manas A, Jyothirmayee K, Richashree , Tenglikar P, Das A J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2022; 14(Suppl 1):S974-S976.

PMID: 36110753 PMC: 9469317. DOI: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_806_21.