Radiographic Evaluation of Crestal Bone Loss Around Dental Implants in Maxilla and Mandible: One Year Prospective Clinical Study

Ajanović, Muhamed; Hamzić, Adis; Redzepagić, S; Kamber-Ćesir, Alma; Kazazić, Lejla; Tosum, Selma

doi:10.15644/asc49/2/6

Cited by 12 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(31 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, the present study agrees with Ajanović et al [41], who reported that the anterior mandible has the highest crestal bone loss. We report a mean 1.2 mm of bone loss in the lower anterior region after 1 year of function, which was significantly greater than the other sites mesially but not distally when adjusted for all variables.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Clinical outcomes of single implant supported crowns versus 3-unit implant-supported fixed dental prostheses in Dubai Health Authority: a retrospective study

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This study assessed retrospectively the clinical outcomes of single implant-supported crowns and implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs). Methods This case series compared biological and technical complications in single implant-supported crowns and implant-supported bridges in a time framed sample of all patients who received dental implants between 2009 and 2016 in Dubai Health Authority. Only 3-unit implant-supported prostheses (FDPs) with one intervening pontic and an implant each end were included for comparison to single crown supported implants. Cantilevered implants, implant-supported dentures and cases involving bone grafts or sinus lifts were excluded. The primary outcome measure was marginal bone loss, measured on digital radiographs taken after prosthesis placement at baseline and one year after implant loading, whilst peri-implantitis and technical complications were secondary outcomes. Mixed regression models adjusted for clustering of implants within patients was used for patient and implant factor associations. Results A total of 454 patients (152 males; 302 females) had 1673 implants. The mean age of males (53.7 years, SD 14.6) was significantly greater than females (49.3 years, SD 12.9, p < 0.001). Mean mesial bone loss on the FDPs was significantly greater at 1 year (1.14 mm, SD 0.63) compared with the mesial surface of single implant-supported crowns (0.30 mm, SD 0.43, p < 0.001). Mean distal bone loss was also significantly greater at 1 year on the distal surfaces of implants supporting bridgework (1.29 mm, SD 0.71) compared with distal surfaces on single implant-supported crowns (0.36 mm, SD 0.54, p < 0.001). Mean marginal bone loss mesially and distally around implants placed in the lower anterior sextant was significantly greater compared to all other sites (p < 0.001). Bone loss by gender, patient’s age and medical condition was not different between the 2 implant groups. Screw loosening was the main technical complication (11.5%) whilst peri-implantitis occurred rarely (0.5%). The 66 cement retained implants had significantly more complications compared to the 1607 screw retained implants (p < 0.001). Conclusions Mean marginal bone loss around the supporting implants of FDPs (3-unit fixed bridgework) was greater than on single implant-supported crowns at one year after implant loading. Position in the mouth was associated with bone loss. Biological and technical complications occurred rarely.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Clinical outcomes of single implant supported crowns versus 3-unit implant-supported fixed dental prostheses in Dubai Health Authority: a retrospective study

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Independent Student t-test (Table 3 and Figure 6) showed that there were no statistically significant differences in mesial and distal marginal bone loss mean values between both treatment groups within each time interval. are in line with values reported in other studies on single implants placed in the posterior maxilla (11). These results conforms also with Herrero-Climent et al trial revealing that peri-implant crestal bone level were similar for both 0.7 and 1.5mm machined collar implant in both maxillary and mandibular posterior regions.…”

Section: B Comparison Of Marginal Bone Loss Between Both Groups At Easupporting

confidence: 93%

Radiographic Evaluation of Crestal Bone Levels of Delayed Single Implants with Two Different Neck Designs in the Posterior Maxilla: A Clinical Study

AbdelMohsen

Mokhtar

Ghanem

et al. 2019

OMX

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although there was no statistically significant difference between these parameters, but similar trend has been noted in a number of other studies, and may be explained by different potential of maxilla and mandible due to the bone remodeling processes [20][21][22]. Given the higher density of bone tissue in the mandible the processes of reactionary changes that occur in this region develops more slowly.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Evaluation of Peri-Implant Bone Reduction Levels from Superimposition Perspective: Pilot Study among Ukrainian Implantology Practice

Goncharuk-Khomyn

Keniuk

2018

Pesqui. bras. odontopediatria clín. integr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To evaluate the possibility and efficiency of using adapted peri-implant bone evaluation method based on the principle of graphical superimposition and compare it to the possibilities of using sagittal sections of CBCT results to register the dynamics of peri-implant bone changes during the first year of implant functioning. Material and Methods: 108 pairs of DICOM data sets were selected and pre-anonymized and coded in Planmeca Romexis ® Viewer software. Each pair of datasets consisted of a CBCT file, obtained immediately after the installation of a dental implant, and one year after its operation. The first method of peri-implant bone changes evaluation was carried out by analyzing the sagittal sections of the CBCT data from the mesial and distal sides of the implant. The second method was followed by original algorithm, which included specific steps of superimposition of graphical images. Results: Superimposition method helped to establish volumetric parameter of circular bone reduction around dental implants after 1 year of their functioning. Such average values for the maxillary distal implants were 3.547 mm3, maxillary frontal implants -3.118 mm3, mandibular distal implants -2.614 mm3, mandibular frontal implants -2.456 mm 3. Correlation values between averages of vertical bone loss parameters and volumetric bone loss parameters riches r=0.954. Among all patients the highest peri-implant bone reduction rates were observed in the distal and frontal areas of the maxilla, even though statistical difference among such parameters of implants installed at the areas of mandible and maxilla was not significant (p > 0.05). Such observation was established during the analysis of results obtained both by digital sagittal cross section from CBCT results and by superimposition method. Conclusion: Using the superimposition principle allows us to evaluate the individual indicator of volumetric bone loss at the peri-implant region. The possibility of taking into account the parameters of bone tissue volume reduction, instead of just geometrical parameter of bone height, allows to individualize the parameters of bone loss among patients of different prosthetic rehabilitation group.

show abstract

Radiographic Evaluation of Crestal Bone Loss Around Dental Implants in Maxilla and Mandible: One Year Prospective Clinical Study

Cited by 12 publications

References 20 publications

Clinical outcomes of single implant supported crowns versus 3-unit implant-supported fixed dental prostheses in Dubai Health Authority: a retrospective study

Clinical outcomes of single implant supported crowns versus 3-unit implant-supported fixed dental prostheses in Dubai Health Authority: a retrospective study

Radiographic Evaluation of Crestal Bone Levels of Delayed Single Implants with Two Different Neck Designs in the Posterior Maxilla: A Clinical Study

Evaluation of Peri-Implant Bone Reduction Levels from Superimposition Perspective: Pilot Study among Ukrainian Implantology Practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About