Are marginal bone levels and implant stability/mobility affected by single-stage platform switched dental implants? A comparative clinical study

Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate short‐term bone level and stability/mobility measurement alterations at platform switched (PS) and standard platform (SP) implants placed in mandibular premolar/molar regions using a single‐stage protocol. Materials and methods Sixteen PS and 16 SP im...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical oral implants research 2012-10, Vol.23 (10), p.1161-1167
Hauptverfasser: Dursun, Erhan, Tulunoglu, Ibrahim, Canpınar, Pınar, Uysal, Serdar, Akalın, Ferda Alev, Tözüm, Tolga F.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1167
container_issue 10
container_start_page 1161
container_title Clinical oral implants research
container_volume 23
creator Dursun, Erhan
Tulunoglu, Ibrahim
Canpınar, Pınar
Uysal, Serdar
Akalın, Ferda Alev
Tözüm, Tolga F.
description Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate short‐term bone level and stability/mobility measurement alterations at platform switched (PS) and standard platform (SP) implants placed in mandibular premolar/molar regions using a single‐stage protocol. Materials and methods Sixteen PS and 16 SP implants restorated with fixed prosthesis were included. Standard implant dimensions were used for both implant systems. After 3 months of osseointegration, implants were connected to abutments and final restorations were performed. Marginal bone loss was measured by standardized periapical radiographs. Implant stability/mobility was determined by resonance frequency analysis (RFA) and mobility measuring (MM) device values. Peri‐implant parameters were evaluated with clinical periodontal indices and all parameters were assessed at baseline, 1, 3, and 6 months after the surgery. Results After 6 months, all implants showed uneventful healing. Radiographic evaluation showed a mean bone loss of 0.72 mm for PS and 0.56 mm for SP implants, and there were no significant differences between implant types. At 6 months, mean implant stability quotient (ISQ) values were 73.38 and 77 for PS and SP implants, respectively. Mean MM values were −4.75 for PS and −6.38 for SP implants. Mean MM values were lower for SP implants compared to PS implants at all time points. No significant differences were detected between implant types according to clinical peri‐implant parameters. Conclusions The micro‐gap at crestal level which immediately exposed to the oral cavity in non‐submerged two part implants seems to have adverse influence on the marginal bone level.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02277.x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1093463400</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1041143463</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4407-5dc7752c48ec22dda51186f659abba192e838507cf4ed711bc7cb06fd276465e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkc2O0zAURi0EYsrAKyAv2SRjO4mdLBCqOlCQKpD4UaXZWI59U1ycpMTuTPMWPDIOKV2PN76Sz_fZ8kEIU5LSuG72KeWEJKQgNGWE0pQwJkR6eoIWl4OnaEEqUiSCcnqFXni_J4TwqqyeoyvGSMXKUizQn-UAuFXDznbK4brvADu4B-ex6gy27cGpLmAfVG2dDeNN288DVk0DOoDB9Yi97XYOkkjtAMdEaPqhxf7BBv0zEga6EMvPZf4dXmLdtwc1qGDvAWtnO6sj4MPRjC_Rs0Y5D6_O-zX68eH999XHZPNl_Wm13CQ6z4lICqOFKJjOS9CMGaMKSkve8KJSda1oxaDMyoII3eRgBKW1FromvDFM8JwXkF2jN3PvYeh_H8EH2VqvwcUnQn_0kpIqy3mWE_IINKc0n-iIljOqh977ARp5GGz83jFCclIn93IyJCdDclIn_6mTpxh9fb7lWLdgLsH_riLwdgYerIPx0cVytfk6TTGfzHnrA5wueTX8klxkopDbz2tZbu-2t7frb_Iu-wtXLLkq</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1041143463</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Are marginal bone levels and implant stability/mobility affected by single-stage platform switched dental implants? A comparative clinical study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Dursun, Erhan ; Tulunoglu, Ibrahim ; Canpınar, Pınar ; Uysal, Serdar ; Akalın, Ferda Alev ; Tözüm, Tolga F.</creator><creatorcontrib>Dursun, Erhan ; Tulunoglu, Ibrahim ; Canpınar, Pınar ; Uysal, Serdar ; Akalın, Ferda Alev ; Tözüm, Tolga F.</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate short‐term bone level and stability/mobility measurement alterations at platform switched (PS) and standard platform (SP) implants placed in mandibular premolar/molar regions using a single‐stage protocol. Materials and methods Sixteen PS and 16 SP implants restorated with fixed prosthesis were included. Standard implant dimensions were used for both implant systems. After 3 months of osseointegration, implants were connected to abutments and final restorations were performed. Marginal bone loss was measured by standardized periapical radiographs. Implant stability/mobility was determined by resonance frequency analysis (RFA) and mobility measuring (MM) device values. Peri‐implant parameters were evaluated with clinical periodontal indices and all parameters were assessed at baseline, 1, 3, and 6 months after the surgery. Results After 6 months, all implants showed uneventful healing. Radiographic evaluation showed a mean bone loss of 0.72 mm for PS and 0.56 mm for SP implants, and there were no significant differences between implant types. At 6 months, mean implant stability quotient (ISQ) values were 73.38 and 77 for PS and SP implants, respectively. Mean MM values were −4.75 for PS and −6.38 for SP implants. Mean MM values were lower for SP implants compared to PS implants at all time points. No significant differences were detected between implant types according to clinical peri‐implant parameters. Conclusions The micro‐gap at crestal level which immediately exposed to the oral cavity in non‐submerged two part implants seems to have adverse influence on the marginal bone level.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0905-7161</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1600-0501</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02277.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22092887</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Denmark: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Adult ; Alveolar Bone Loss - diagnostic imaging ; Bone implants ; bone level ; bone loss ; Dental Implantation, Endosseous - methods ; Dental Implants ; Dental Prosthesis Design ; Dental Prosthesis Retention ; Dentistry ; Female ; Humans ; Jaw, Edentulous, Partially - rehabilitation ; Male ; micro-gap ; Middle Aged ; primary stability ; Radiography ; Risk Factors</subject><ispartof>Clinical oral implants research, 2012-10, Vol.23 (10), p.1161-1167</ispartof><rights>2011 John Wiley &amp; Sons A/S</rights><rights>2011 John Wiley &amp; Sons A/S.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4407-5dc7752c48ec22dda51186f659abba192e838507cf4ed711bc7cb06fd276465e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4407-5dc7752c48ec22dda51186f659abba192e838507cf4ed711bc7cb06fd276465e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1600-0501.2011.02277.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1600-0501.2011.02277.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22092887$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Dursun, Erhan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tulunoglu, Ibrahim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Canpınar, Pınar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Uysal, Serdar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Akalın, Ferda Alev</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tözüm, Tolga F.</creatorcontrib><title>Are marginal bone levels and implant stability/mobility affected by single-stage platform switched dental implants? A comparative clinical study</title><title>Clinical oral implants research</title><addtitle>Clin. Oral Impl. Res</addtitle><description>Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate short‐term bone level and stability/mobility measurement alterations at platform switched (PS) and standard platform (SP) implants placed in mandibular premolar/molar regions using a single‐stage protocol. Materials and methods Sixteen PS and 16 SP implants restorated with fixed prosthesis were included. Standard implant dimensions were used for both implant systems. After 3 months of osseointegration, implants were connected to abutments and final restorations were performed. Marginal bone loss was measured by standardized periapical radiographs. Implant stability/mobility was determined by resonance frequency analysis (RFA) and mobility measuring (MM) device values. Peri‐implant parameters were evaluated with clinical periodontal indices and all parameters were assessed at baseline, 1, 3, and 6 months after the surgery. Results After 6 months, all implants showed uneventful healing. Radiographic evaluation showed a mean bone loss of 0.72 mm for PS and 0.56 mm for SP implants, and there were no significant differences between implant types. At 6 months, mean implant stability quotient (ISQ) values were 73.38 and 77 for PS and SP implants, respectively. Mean MM values were −4.75 for PS and −6.38 for SP implants. Mean MM values were lower for SP implants compared to PS implants at all time points. No significant differences were detected between implant types according to clinical peri‐implant parameters. Conclusions The micro‐gap at crestal level which immediately exposed to the oral cavity in non‐submerged two part implants seems to have adverse influence on the marginal bone level.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Alveolar Bone Loss - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Bone implants</subject><subject>bone level</subject><subject>bone loss</subject><subject>Dental Implantation, Endosseous - methods</subject><subject>Dental Implants</subject><subject>Dental Prosthesis Design</subject><subject>Dental Prosthesis Retention</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Jaw, Edentulous, Partially - rehabilitation</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>micro-gap</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>primary stability</subject><subject>Radiography</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><issn>0905-7161</issn><issn>1600-0501</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkc2O0zAURi0EYsrAKyAv2SRjO4mdLBCqOlCQKpD4UaXZWI59U1ycpMTuTPMWPDIOKV2PN76Sz_fZ8kEIU5LSuG72KeWEJKQgNGWE0pQwJkR6eoIWl4OnaEEqUiSCcnqFXni_J4TwqqyeoyvGSMXKUizQn-UAuFXDznbK4brvADu4B-ex6gy27cGpLmAfVG2dDeNN288DVk0DOoDB9Yi97XYOkkjtAMdEaPqhxf7BBv0zEga6EMvPZf4dXmLdtwc1qGDvAWtnO6sj4MPRjC_Rs0Y5D6_O-zX68eH999XHZPNl_Wm13CQ6z4lICqOFKJjOS9CMGaMKSkve8KJSda1oxaDMyoII3eRgBKW1FromvDFM8JwXkF2jN3PvYeh_H8EH2VqvwcUnQn_0kpIqy3mWE_IINKc0n-iIljOqh977ARp5GGz83jFCclIn93IyJCdDclIn_6mTpxh9fb7lWLdgLsH_riLwdgYerIPx0cVytfk6TTGfzHnrA5wueTX8klxkopDbz2tZbu-2t7frb_Iu-wtXLLkq</recordid><startdate>201210</startdate><enddate>201210</enddate><creator>Dursun, Erhan</creator><creator>Tulunoglu, Ibrahim</creator><creator>Canpınar, Pınar</creator><creator>Uysal, Serdar</creator><creator>Akalın, Ferda Alev</creator><creator>Tözüm, Tolga F.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201210</creationdate><title>Are marginal bone levels and implant stability/mobility affected by single-stage platform switched dental implants? A comparative clinical study</title><author>Dursun, Erhan ; Tulunoglu, Ibrahim ; Canpınar, Pınar ; Uysal, Serdar ; Akalın, Ferda Alev ; Tözüm, Tolga F.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4407-5dc7752c48ec22dda51186f659abba192e838507cf4ed711bc7cb06fd276465e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Alveolar Bone Loss - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Bone implants</topic><topic>bone level</topic><topic>bone loss</topic><topic>Dental Implantation, Endosseous - methods</topic><topic>Dental Implants</topic><topic>Dental Prosthesis Design</topic><topic>Dental Prosthesis Retention</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Jaw, Edentulous, Partially - rehabilitation</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>micro-gap</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>primary stability</topic><topic>Radiography</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Dursun, Erhan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tulunoglu, Ibrahim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Canpınar, Pınar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Uysal, Serdar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Akalın, Ferda Alev</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tözüm, Tolga F.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Calcium &amp; Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Clinical oral implants research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Dursun, Erhan</au><au>Tulunoglu, Ibrahim</au><au>Canpınar, Pınar</au><au>Uysal, Serdar</au><au>Akalın, Ferda Alev</au><au>Tözüm, Tolga F.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Are marginal bone levels and implant stability/mobility affected by single-stage platform switched dental implants? A comparative clinical study</atitle><jtitle>Clinical oral implants research</jtitle><addtitle>Clin. Oral Impl. Res</addtitle><date>2012-10</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>23</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>1161</spage><epage>1167</epage><pages>1161-1167</pages><issn>0905-7161</issn><eissn>1600-0501</eissn><abstract>Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate short‐term bone level and stability/mobility measurement alterations at platform switched (PS) and standard platform (SP) implants placed in mandibular premolar/molar regions using a single‐stage protocol. Materials and methods Sixteen PS and 16 SP implants restorated with fixed prosthesis were included. Standard implant dimensions were used for both implant systems. After 3 months of osseointegration, implants were connected to abutments and final restorations were performed. Marginal bone loss was measured by standardized periapical radiographs. Implant stability/mobility was determined by resonance frequency analysis (RFA) and mobility measuring (MM) device values. Peri‐implant parameters were evaluated with clinical periodontal indices and all parameters were assessed at baseline, 1, 3, and 6 months after the surgery. Results After 6 months, all implants showed uneventful healing. Radiographic evaluation showed a mean bone loss of 0.72 mm for PS and 0.56 mm for SP implants, and there were no significant differences between implant types. At 6 months, mean implant stability quotient (ISQ) values were 73.38 and 77 for PS and SP implants, respectively. Mean MM values were −4.75 for PS and −6.38 for SP implants. Mean MM values were lower for SP implants compared to PS implants at all time points. No significant differences were detected between implant types according to clinical peri‐implant parameters. Conclusions The micro‐gap at crestal level which immediately exposed to the oral cavity in non‐submerged two part implants seems to have adverse influence on the marginal bone level.</abstract><cop>Denmark</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>22092887</pmid><doi>10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02277.x</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0905-7161
ispartof Clinical oral implants research, 2012-10, Vol.23 (10), p.1161-1167
issn 0905-7161
1600-0501
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1093463400
source MEDLINE; Access via Wiley Online Library
subjects Adult
Alveolar Bone Loss - diagnostic imaging
Bone implants
bone level
bone loss
Dental Implantation, Endosseous - methods
Dental Implants
Dental Prosthesis Design
Dental Prosthesis Retention
Dentistry
Female
Humans
Jaw, Edentulous, Partially - rehabilitation
Male
micro-gap
Middle Aged
primary stability
Radiography
Risk Factors
title Are marginal bone levels and implant stability/mobility affected by single-stage platform switched dental implants? A comparative clinical study
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-20T10%3A14%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Are%20marginal%20bone%20levels%20and%20implant%20stability/mobility%20affected%20by%20single-stage%20platform%20switched%20dental%20implants?%20A%20comparative%20clinical%20study&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20oral%20implants%20research&rft.au=Dursun,%20Erhan&rft.date=2012-10&rft.volume=23&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=1161&rft.epage=1167&rft.pages=1161-1167&rft.issn=0905-7161&rft.eissn=1600-0501&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02277.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1041143463%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1041143463&rft_id=info:pmid/22092887&rfr_iscdi=true