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