We have located links that may give you full text access.
Influence of titanium base, lithium disilicate restoration and vertical soft tissue thickness on bone stability around triangular-shaped implants: A prospective clinical trial.
Clinical Oral Implants Research 2018 May 32
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate how vertical mucosal tissue thickness affects crestal bone stability around triangular-shaped bone-level implants, restored with low profile titanium bases and monolithic lithium disilicate restorations.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty-five bone-level implants of 4.3 mm diameter were evaluated in 55 patients (22 males and 34 females, mean age 48.3 ± 3.4 years) in prospective cohort study. According to vertical mucosal thickness, patients were assigned into three groups: 1 (thin, 2 mm or less), 2 (medium, 2.5 mm) and 3 (thick, 3 mm and more). Implants were placed in posterior mandible and maxilla in one-stage approach and, after integration, were restored with single screw-retained monolithic lithium disilicate crowns, using low gingival profile titanium bases. Radiographic examination was performed after implant placement and after 1-year follow-up. Crestal bone loss was registered mesially and distally, and mean value was calculated. One-way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD tests were applied; significance was set to 0.05.
RESULTS: Mean vertical tissue thickness in 1 group was 1.76 ± 0.26 mm, 2 group-2.5 mm and 3.91 ± 0.59 mm in group 3, with statistically significant difference between all groups (p < 0.001). After 1-year follow-up, implants in group 1 (thin) had 1.25 ± 0.8 mm bone loss. Implants in group 2 (medium) had 0.98 ± 0.06, while implants in group 3 (thick) lost 0.43 ± 0.37 mm of crestal bone. Tukey's HSD test showed that differences between 1/3 and 2/3 were statistically significant (p < 0.001 and p = 0.0014, respectively), while between 1 and 2 was not significant (p = 0.310).
CONCLUSIONS: Significantly less bone loss occurs around triangular-shaped bone-level implants in thick mucosal tissues (≥3 mm), compared to medium or thin tissue biotype. Crestal bone loss did not differ between medium and thin tissues.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty-five bone-level implants of 4.3 mm diameter were evaluated in 55 patients (22 males and 34 females, mean age 48.3 ± 3.4 years) in prospective cohort study. According to vertical mucosal thickness, patients were assigned into three groups: 1 (thin, 2 mm or less), 2 (medium, 2.5 mm) and 3 (thick, 3 mm and more). Implants were placed in posterior mandible and maxilla in one-stage approach and, after integration, were restored with single screw-retained monolithic lithium disilicate crowns, using low gingival profile titanium bases. Radiographic examination was performed after implant placement and after 1-year follow-up. Crestal bone loss was registered mesially and distally, and mean value was calculated. One-way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD tests were applied; significance was set to 0.05.
RESULTS: Mean vertical tissue thickness in 1 group was 1.76 ± 0.26 mm, 2 group-2.5 mm and 3.91 ± 0.59 mm in group 3, with statistically significant difference between all groups (p < 0.001). After 1-year follow-up, implants in group 1 (thin) had 1.25 ± 0.8 mm bone loss. Implants in group 2 (medium) had 0.98 ± 0.06, while implants in group 3 (thick) lost 0.43 ± 0.37 mm of crestal bone. Tukey's HSD test showed that differences between 1/3 and 2/3 were statistically significant (p < 0.001 and p = 0.0014, respectively), while between 1 and 2 was not significant (p = 0.310).
CONCLUSIONS: Significantly less bone loss occurs around triangular-shaped bone-level implants in thick mucosal tissues (≥3 mm), compared to medium or thin tissue biotype. Crestal bone loss did not differ between medium and thin tissues.
Full text links
Trending Papers
A Personalized Approach to the Management of Congestion in Acute Heart Failure.Heart International 2023
Potential Mechanisms of the Protective Effects of the Cardiometabolic Drugs Type-2 Sodium-Glucose Transporter Inhibitors and Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists in Heart Failure.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 Februrary 21
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app