No abstract

Objective: The objective of the study is to compare two different implant designs having different neck configuration and neck interfaces. Materials and Methods: Fifty subjects were randomly divided into 2 groups, each containing 25 subjects. In Group I, conical connection (CC) (Nobel Biocare) with back-tapered collar dental implant and in Group II, external-hexagon (EH) (Nobel Biocare) with flat-to-flat implant-abutment interface dental implant was used. Radiographic marginal bone crest level and marginal bone loss (MBL) were compared. Results: A significant less MBL was seen in Group I compared to Group II recorded at different intervals of time ( P < 0.05). Conclusion: CC implants with back-tapered collar exhibited less MBL as compared to EH implants with flat-to-flat implant-abutment interface.