Anterior single implants with different neck designs: 5 Year results of a randomized clinical trial

Hartog, Laurens den; Meijer, Henny J. A.; Vissink, Arjan; Raghoebar, Gerry M.

doi:10.1111/cid.12498

Cited by 15 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some studies reported a high mean bone loss despite lower percentages of bleeding on probing. den Hartog, Meijer, Vissink and Raghoebar (2017) reported a mean bone loss of 2.3 mm after a follow‐up of 5‐year with a corresponding 87.5% BoP. Arnhart et al.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How do peri‐implant biologic parameters correspond with implant survival and peri‐implantitis? A critical review

Doornewaard

Jacquet

Cosyn

et al. 2018

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThe aim of this critical review was to evaluate whether commonly used biologic diagnostic parameters correspond to implant survival and peri‐implantitis prevalence.Materials and methodsPublications from 2011 to 2017 were selected by an electronic search using the Pubmed database of the US National Library of Medicine. Prospective and retrospective studies with a mean follow‐up time of at least 5 years and reporting prevalence of peri‐implantitis as well as mean bone loss and standard deviation were selected. The correlation between reported prevalence of peri‐implantitis and reported implant survival, mean follow‐up time, mean bone loss, mean probing depth, and mean bleeding on probing was calculated. Mean bone loss and standard deviation were used for estimation of proportion of implants with bone loss exceeding 1, 2, and 3 mm.ResultsFull‐text analysis was performed for 255 papers from 4,173 available ones, and 41 met all the inclusion criteria. The overall mean weighted survival rate was 96.9% (89.9%–100%) and the reported prevalence of peri‐implantitis ranged between 0% and 39.7%, based on 15 different case definitions. The overall weighted bone loss was 1.1 mm based on 8,182 implants and an average mean loading time ranging from 5 to 20 years. No correlation was found between mean bone loss and the reported prevalence of peri‐implantitis. The estimated prevalence of implants with bone loss above 2 mm was 23%. The overall weighted mean probing depth was 3.3 mm, and mean weighted bleeding was 52.2%. Only a weak correlation was found between survival and function time (r = −0.49). There was no relation between the probing depth or bleeding and the mean bone loss, mean follow‐up time, and reported prevalence of peri‐implantitis.ConclusionBiologic parameters mean probing depth and mean bleeding on probing do not correlate with mean bone loss and this irrespective of follow‐up. Case definition for peri‐implantitis varied significantly between studies indicating that an unambiguous definition based on a specified threshold for bone loss is not agreed upon in the literature.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…den Hartog et al. (2017) reported the highest mean PPD (4.3 mm) and a reported prevalence of peri‐implantitis of 11.5%. Mean BoP showed a strong correlation with peri‐implantitis (Pearson r = 0.45).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do peri‐implant biologic parameters correspond with implant survival and peri‐implantitis? A critical review

Doornewaard

Jacquet

Cosyn

et al. 2018

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In scalloped implants, marginal bone level changes from surgery to 1 year was 1.36 mm ( N = 2 studies, 95% CI: [0.72, 2.00], p < 0.001) higher than that of cylindrical implants (post hoc power analysis >95%). The 5‐year report of den Hartog et al () confirms the maintenance of the difference between scalloped and flat implants, with 44% of the scalloped implants presenting bone loss >2 mm.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…Thirty‐four studies addressed two‐piece bone level implants, with a total of 2,421 implants at baseline and 2,080 implants at the final follow‐up. Eleven studies compared machined collar implants with rough collar implants (Alsabeeha, Payne, Silva, & Thomson, ; Hsu et al, ; Jacobs et al, ; Kim, Lee, Lee, & Yi, ; Ravald et al, ; Vroom et al, ) and with rough collar implants with microthreads or microgrooves in the coronal portion (den Hartog, Meijer, Vissink, & Raghoebar, ; Hof et al, ; Nickenig et al, ; Penarrocha‐Diago et al, ; Shin et al, ). All studies presented conventional loading protocols (superior to 2 months of osseointegration) except for the work of Alsabeeha et al, with early loading at 6 weeks, and the work of Kim et al () with immediate loading.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Titanium dental implants with different collar design and surface modifications: A systematic review on survival rates and marginal bone levels

Messias

Nicolau

Guerra

2018

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim The aim of this study was to compare clinical and radiographic outcomes of dental implants with different neck characteristics. Methods A protocol‐oriented search aimed at the question: “In patients subjected to tooth replacement with screw‐type dental implants does the modification of the implant neck macro‐ or microgeometry contribute to the improvement of survival rates and maintenance of the peri‐implant marginal bone levels?” Primary outcomes were survival and marginal bone level (MBL) changes evaluated on randomized controlled trials with >10 participants and follow‐up >1 year. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. The review follows the PRISMA statement. Results Forty‐three studies compared: (a) One‐ versus two‐piece implants (N = 7); (b) Two‐piece implants with different neck characteristics (machined and rough collars, microthreads, LASER microtexturing) (N = 21); (c) Two‐piece implants with macrogeometry modifications (tapering, back‐tapering, and scalloping) (N = 6). One‐ and two‐piece implants showed similar survival (RR = 0.45, 95% CI: [0.12, 1.66], p = 0.23) and MBL changes (WMD = 0.09 mm, 95% CI: [−0.27, 0.45], p = 0.64) at 1‐year post‐loading. Machined collar implants have higher risk of early failure than rough collar implants (RR = 3.96, 95% CI: [1.12, 13.93], p = 0.03) and 0.43 mm higher bone resorption (95% CI: [0.0, 0.86], p = 0.05). Microthreads (WMD = 0.07 mm, 95% CI: [−0.01, 0.15], p = 0.10) and LASER microtexturing (WMD = 0.15 mm, 95% CI: [−0.35, 0.65], p = 0.56) do not reduce bone resorption. Scalloped implants have 1.26 mm higher resorption (95% CI: [0.72, 2.00], p < 0.001). Conclusions One‐ and two‐piece implants have similar survival and MBL changes. Rough collar implants have lower MBL changes than machined collar implants. Additional modifications to rough collars are irrelevant.

show abstract

The effect of implant‐abutment connections on peri‐implant bone levels around single implants in the aesthetic zone: A systematic review and a meta‐analysis

Meijndert

Raghoebar

Vissink

et al. 2021

Clinical & Exp Dental Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To systematically review literature about the effect of different implant‐abutment interface designs on peri‐implant bone level changes, implant loss and mid‐buccal mucosa changes around single implants in the anterior maxilla. Reviewing three connection configurations: Platform switched conical (PS‐conical); Platform switched parallel (PS‐parallel); Platform matched parallel (PM‐parallel). Methods A detailed search was carried out in Pubmed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Scopus, Open Gray and African journals Online (until December 1, 2020) and was restricted to clinical prospective studies of at least 1 year and with at least 10 human participants. A meta regression analysis was carried out primarily on the pooled peri‐implant bone level changes followed by implant loss and mid‐buccal mucosa level change. Risk of bias was assessed with RoB 2.0 and ROBINS‐I. The manuscript complied with the PRISMA guidelines and was registered in the PROSPERO database (ID: 225092). Results A total of 5513 hits gave 44 eligible articles for the analyses. Bone level change did not differ significantly between the two platform switched connections; their bone loss scores were significantly lower than PM‐connection. The PS‐conical connections have significantly lower implant losses than the PM connection. Mid‐buccal mucosa level change was comparable between the three connection configurations. Moderate to high risk of bias was detected in the included studies. Conclusions The performance of PS‐conical and PS‐parallel connection configurations both favored bone loss scores compared to the PM‐parallel connection configuration. All three demonstrated mid‐buccal mucosa changes that were small and did not differ significantly amongst the groups.

show abstract

Anterior single implants with different neck designs: 5 Year results of a randomized clinical trial

Abstract: For anterior single tooth replacements, scalloped implants show less favorable radiographic and clinical outcome compared to regular implants with a smooth neck or rough neck.

Cited by 15 publications

References 24 publications

How do peri‐implant biologic parameters correspond with implant survival and peri‐implantitis? A critical review

How do peri‐implant biologic parameters correspond with implant survival and peri‐implantitis? A critical review

Titanium dental implants with different collar design and surface modifications: A systematic review on survival rates and marginal bone levels

The effect of implant‐abutment connections on peri‐implant bone levels around single implants in the aesthetic zone: A systematic review and a meta‐analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About