This study was designed to radiographically evaluate the effect of surface macro-and microstructures within the coronal portion of the external hex implant at the marginal bone change after loading. The fifty-four patients included in the study were randomly assigned to treatment groups with rough-surface implants (TiUnite, n = 45), a hybrid of smooth and rough surface implants (Restore, n = 45) or rough-surface with microthreads implants (Hexplant, n = 45). Clinical and radiographic examinations were conducted at the time of implant loading (baseline) and at 1-year post-loading. A three-level mixed-effect ancova was used to test the significance of the mean marginal bone change of the three implant groups from baseline to 1-year follow-up. At 1-year, significant differences were noted in marginal bone loss recorded for the three groups (P < 0.0001). The rough surface with microthread implants had a mean crestal bone loss of 0.42 +/- 0.27 mm; the rough surface implants, 0.81 +/- 0.27 mm; and the hybrid surface implants, 0.89 +/- 0.41 mm. Within the limitations of this study, a rough surface with microthreads at the coronal part of implant maintained the marginal bone level against functional loading better than implants without these two features.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the change of marginal bone level radiographically around three different implant systems after 3 years in function. Fifty-four patients were included and randomly assigned to three treatment groups of rough-surface implants (TiUnite, n = 37), hybrid of smooth and rough-surface implants (Restore, n = 38) and rough surface with microthread implants (Hexplant, n = 45). Clinical and radiographic examinations were conducted at the time of implant loading (baseline), 1 and 3 years after loading. A three-level mixed-effect analysis of covariance (ancova) was used to test the significance of the mean marginal bone change of the three implant groups. A total 120 of 135 implants completed the study. None of the implants failed to integrate. Significant differences were noted in the marginal bone loss recorded for the three groups (P < 0.0001). At 3 years, the rough surface with microthread implants had a mean crestal bone loss of 0.59 +/- 0.30 mm; the rough-surface implants, 0.95 +/- 0.27 mm; and the hybrid surface implants, 1.05 +/- 0.34 mm. Within the limitations of this study, rough-surface implants with microthread at the coronal part might have a long-term positive effect in maintaining the marginal bone level against functional loading in comparison with implants without these two features.

PURPOSEThe aim of this study was to investigate a comparison of implant bone bed preparation with Er,Cr:YSGG laser and conventional drills on the relationship between implant stability quotient (ISQ) values and implant insertion variables.MATERIALS AND METHODSForty implants were inserted into two different types of pig rib bone. One group was prepared with conventional drills and a total of 20 implants were inserted into type I and type II bone. The other group was prepared with a Er,Cr:YSGG laser and a total of 20 implants were inserted into type I and type II bone. ISQ, maximum insertion torque, angular momentum, and insertion torque energy values were measured.RESULTSThe mean values for variables were significantly higher in type I bone than in type II bone (P < .01). In type I bone, the ISQ values in the drill group were significantly higher than in the laser group (P < .05). In type II bone, the ISQ values in the laser group were significantly higher than in the drill group (P < .01). In both type I and type II bone, the maximum insertion torque, total energy, and total angular momentum values between the drill and laser groups did not differ significantly (P ≥ .05). The ISQ values were correlated with maximum insertion torque (P < .01, r = .731), total energy (P < .01, r = .696), and angular momentum (P < .01, r = .696).CONCLUSIONWithin the limitations of this study, the effects of bone bed preparation with Er,Cr:YSGG laser on the relationship between implant stability quotient (ISQ) values and implant insertion variables were comparable to those of drilling.