Effect of Opposite Tooth Condition on Marginal Bone Loss around Submerged Dental Implants: A Retrospective Study with a 3-Year Follow-Up

Dorj, Odontuya; Lin, Hsi Kuei; Salamanca, Eisner; Pan, Yu; Wu, Yifan; Hsu, Yung Szu; Lin, Jay; Lin, Chien Ju; Chang, Wei Jen

doi:10.3390/ijerph182010715

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Research conducted by Dorj et al (2021) showed a statistically significant difference in bone resorption in the period after 3 years, so one could conclude that duration of wearing a work affects bone change, which is in contrast to this research ( 16 ).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 84%

“…Likewise, in this study, the influence of the state of the opposite jaw on the change in bone height was also not proven. In contrast to this, in the study conducted by Dorj et al (2021), it was found that a statistically significant difference in bone change, depending on the antagonist, exists and is greater in the case of metal-ceramic as the antagonist ( 16 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Tooth-Implant-Supported Prosthetic Structures Versus Implant-Supported Restorations

Bujak,

Brakus,

Borić

2023

Acta Stomatol Croat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives The primary aim was to compare the amount of bone height change that occurs around the tooth and the implant when having tooth-implant-supported prosthetic restorations versus bone height change that appears around implants in only implant-supported prosthetic restorations. The secondary aim was to examine the influence of various factors such as the number of teeth involved in the construction, their endodontic treatment, number of implants, the type of implantology construction, the jaw in which the construction is located, the condition of the opposite jaw, gender, age, and working time, as well as to examine whether the initial bone level influenced the amount of change in bone height itself. Materials and methods With a total of 50 respondents, 25 X-ray panoramic images were representing tooth-implant-supported prosthetic restorations, while the other 25 were representing implant-supported prosthetic restorations. Bone measures were taken (from enamel-cement junction/implant neck to the most apical bone point) from 2 panoramic radiographs. The first one is immediately after the implant placement and the second and the last one again in half a year up to seven years after, depending on the time when the photo was taken for each patient. The obtained difference represented the bone resorption, the bone formation, or a state without change. Influence of different factors, such as sex, age of the patient, working time, the number of teeth involved in the construction, endodontic treatment, number of implants, the type of implant construction, the jaw where the construction is located, the condition of the opposite jaw, as well as the initial bone condition, was examined. During the statistical analysis, frequency tables, basic statistical parameters, the Mann-Whitney U test, the Kruskal-Wallis Anova, Wilcoxon test, and regression analysis were used, and the results were presented in tabular form and the form of the Pareto diagram of t-values. Results No statistically significant difference in bone change (whether we are talking about the place of the implant (-0.359±1.009 and median value 0.000), the place of a tooth (-0.428±0.746 and median value -0,150) in tooth-implant supported restorations, or the place of the implant in case of implant-supported structures (-0,059±0,200 and median value -0,120)) was proven. When talking about the influence of other factors, by regression analysis, the number of implants was shown to be the only factor with a statistically significant influence (β=0.54; P=0.019) in a change of bone level, but only when talking about implant-supported restorations. Conclusion No significant difference was proven between bone height change, neither around the tooth nor the implant in tooth-implant-supported prosthetic restorations compared to the bone height changes around the implant in only implant-supported prosthetic restorations. Among all the examined factors, the number o...

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 84%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Tooth-Implant-Supported Prosthetic Structures Versus Implant-Supported Restorations

Bujak,

Brakus,

Borić

2023

Acta Stomatol Croat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These opposing conditions results were in agreement with the previously published study. Authors found 0.30 mm of MBL for the natural teeth group and 0.53 mm of MBL for the fixed restoration group after 36-month loading [ 47 ]. Although the level of bone loss was slightly higher in the present study, lower marginal bone loss noted in the natural teeth group when compared with the dental prosthesis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peri-Implant Marginal Bone Changes around Dental Implants with Platform-Switched and Platform-Matched Abutments: A Retrospective 5-Year Radiographic Evaluation

Lin

Pan

et al. 2022

JPM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Preserving the marginal bone level (MBL) is essential for the long-term success of dental implant therapy, and bone remodeling around dental implants is considered to vary with time. Numerous studies comparing the platform-switching (PS) and platform-matching (PM) dental implants have indicated that PS dental implants showed a lesser reduction for the MBL, and the majority of them had a relatively short period. This study aimed to evaluate vertical and horizontal bone defects by using digital periapical radiographs to examine the changes in MBL around PM and PS dental implants over 5 years after functional loading. The vertical MBL (vMBL) was measured from the implant–abutment junction to the first bone-to-implant contact. The horizontal MBL (hMBL) was measured from the implant–abutment junction to the bone crest. All data were presented as means ± standard errors. Paired and independent t-tests with Welch’s correction were used to analyze the data. A total of 61 dental implants in 38 patients after 5 years of functional loading were evaluated. Over time, PS dental implants were more likely to gain bone; by contrast, PM dental implants were more likely to lose bone during the observation time. Changes in vMBL for PS dental implants were significantly less than those for PM dental implants at 1-year (p = 0.045), 3-year (p = 0.021), and 5-year (p = 0.010) loading. Likewise, changes in hMBL for PS dental implants were significantly smaller than in those for PM dental implants at 3-year (p = 0.021) and 5-year (p = 0.006) loading; however, the changes were minimal in both approaches. PS dental implants had a significant increment in the percentage of bone integration, whereas that for PM dental implants dropped over time, with no significance. In PS dental implants that occlude with natural teeth, vertical and horizontal bone gain was observed, and it was significant at 3 years (p = 0.023). A significant horizontal bone gain was observed in the opposing natural teeth at 3-year (p = 0.002) and 5-year loading (p = 0.002). The PS concept appears to preserve more MBL around dental implants by stabilizing the vMBL and hMBL over a 5-year period. A minimal marginal bone change was detected in both concepts. The opposing natural teeth at PS dental implants showed a favorable effect on marginal bone tissues.

show abstract

“…The measurement method was based on a previous study [ 26 ] in which both the mesial and distal MBLs were measured from the fixture platform to the alveolar ridge.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…After taking baseline radiographs, follow-up radiographs should be taken annually thereafter [ 25 ]. The measurement method involving measuring the distance of the mesial and distal MBLs from the fixture platform to the alveolar ridge was commonly used in previous studies [ 26 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Marginal Bone Level Evaluation of Fixed Partial Dental Prostheses Using Preformed Stock versus CAD/CAM Customized Abutments

Lin

Salamanca

et al. 2022

JPM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The maintenance of marginal bone levels around dental implants is an important criterion for evaluating the success of implants. Although computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) customized abutments (CAs) provide more flexible solutions, compared with the original preformed stock abutments (PAs), there are dimensional tolerances and underlying drawbacks in the production of CAD/CAM CAs, which may change the tightness and seamless connection between fixtures and abutments set by the manufacturer and then affect the long-term stability of the abutments. This study aimed to examine the change in both mesial and distal bone levels using digital periapical radiographs to evaluate the difference between CAD/CAM CAs and original PAs.Material and methods: Radiographs were taken before delivery; after functional loading for 1 month; and after 3, 6, and 12 months; and the vertical marginal bone levels (vMBLs) of both the mesial and distal surrounding implant bones were measured. All data are presented as means ± standard errors and were analyzed using Student’s t-test. A p-value < 0.05 was judged to represent a significant difference. Results: A total of 57 implants in 50 patients were divided into 22 CAD/CAM CAs and 35 original stock abutments. The PAs appeared to have a more stable bone level. By contrast, the amount of bone level change in the CAs was higher than that in the PAs. The change in the vMBL of the CAs was significantly more than that of the PAs after functional loading for 1 month (p = 0.006), 3 months (p = 0.013), 6 months (p = 0.014), and 12 months (p = 0.002). In contrast, the distal marginal bone level was lower than the mesial marginal bone level in any period. Nevertheless, the bone levels of the CAs and PAs in any period were comparable with no significant difference. Conclusion: Significant differences were found between the mesial and distal bone levels in the PAs. The CAD/CAM CAs showed a significantly greater bone level change than the original stock abutments after functional loading.

show abstract

Effect of Opposite Tooth Condition on Marginal Bone Loss around Submerged Dental Implants: A Retrospective Study with a 3-Year Follow-Up

Cited by 4 publications

References 30 publications

Tooth-Implant-Supported Prosthetic Structures Versus Implant-Supported Restorations

Tooth-Implant-Supported Prosthetic Structures Versus Implant-Supported Restorations

Peri-Implant Marginal Bone Changes around Dental Implants with Platform-Switched and Platform-Matched Abutments: A Retrospective 5-Year Radiographic Evaluation

Marginal Bone Level Evaluation of Fixed Partial Dental Prostheses Using Preformed Stock versus CAD/CAM Customized Abutments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About