Influence of implant neck design on facial bone crest dimensions in the esthetic zone analyzed by cone beam CT: a comparative study with a 5-to-9-year follow-up
Aim To examine the influence of two different neck designs on facial bone crest dimensions in esthetic single implant sites after a 5‐to‐9‐year follow‐up analyzed by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and methods Sixty‐one patients with an implant‐borne single crown following early impl...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical oral implants research 2016-09, Vol.27 (9), p.1055-1064 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1064 |
---|---|
container_issue | 9 |
container_start_page | 1055 |
container_title | Clinical oral implants research |
container_volume | 27 |
creator | Chappuis, Vivianne Bornstein, Michael M. Buser, Daniel Belser, Urs |
description | Aim
To examine the influence of two different neck designs on facial bone crest dimensions in esthetic single implant sites after a 5‐to‐9‐year follow‐up analyzed by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).
Materials and methods
Sixty‐one patients with an implant‐borne single crown following early implant placement in the esthetic zone were enrolled. The test group consisted of a bone level (BL) neck design exhibiting a hydrophilic micro‐rough surface combined with a platform‐switching interface (PS) (n = 20). The control group comprised a soft tissue level (STL) neck design exhibiting a hydrophobic machined surface with a matching butt‐joint interface (n = 41). Standardized clinical, radiologic, and esthetic parameters were applied. The facial bone crest dimensions were assessed by CBCT.
Results
Soft tissue parameters and pink esthetic scores yielded no significant differences between the two designs. Major differences were only observed at the implant shoulder level. The height of the facial bone crest for the BL design was located 0.2 mm above the implant shoulder level, whereas for the STL design, its location was 1.6 mm below. The width of the peri‐implant saucer‐like bone defect was reduced by 40% for the BL implant design. No differences were observed 2 mm below the shoulder level.
Conclusions
The results of this comparative study suggest better crestal bone stability on the facial aspect of single implant sites in the esthetic zone for a BL design with a platform‐switching concept when compared with STL implants with a butt‐joint interface. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/clr.12692 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1827880535</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1816638534</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5362-55c811c5a3fd327cd4afb6580850314caad2d99f21c65f7521c49f5eee670bae3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkcFu1DAQhiMEotvCgRdAPsLBrR3HTsINraC0rIqoijhajjNmTR17ayds06fhUfGybW9IzGU0M9_80sxfFK8oOaY5TrSLx7QUbfmkWFBBCCac0KfFgrSE45oKelAcpvSTECLapn1eHJSC1XlYLYrfZ964CbwGFAyyw8YpPyIP-hr1kOwPj4JHRmmrHOqCB6QjpBH1dgCfbPAJWY_GNaDcXcNoNbrbUcorN99Bj7oZ6V2jAzWg5dU7pHI9bFRUo_0FKI1TP6OtHdd5wPEYcItnUBGZ4FzY4mnzonhmlEvw8j4fFd8-frhafsKrL6dny_crrDkTJeZcN5RqrpjpWVnrvlKmE7whDSeMVlqpvuzb1pRUC25qnnPVGg4AoiadAnZUvNnrbmK4mfI1crBJg8v_gDAlSZuybhrCGf8PlArBGs6qjL7dozqGlCIYuYl2UHGWlMiddzJ7J_96l9nX97JTN0D_SD6YlYGTPbC1DuZ_K8nl6vJBEu83bBrh9nFDxWspalZz-f3iVJ5X5-3nrxeXkrI_dc6zJw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1816638534</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Influence of implant neck design on facial bone crest dimensions in the esthetic zone analyzed by cone beam CT: a comparative study with a 5-to-9-year follow-up</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Chappuis, Vivianne ; Bornstein, Michael M. ; Buser, Daniel ; Belser, Urs</creator><creatorcontrib>Chappuis, Vivianne ; Bornstein, Michael M. ; Buser, Daniel ; Belser, Urs</creatorcontrib><description>Aim
To examine the influence of two different neck designs on facial bone crest dimensions in esthetic single implant sites after a 5‐to‐9‐year follow‐up analyzed by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).
Materials and methods
Sixty‐one patients with an implant‐borne single crown following early implant placement in the esthetic zone were enrolled. The test group consisted of a bone level (BL) neck design exhibiting a hydrophilic micro‐rough surface combined with a platform‐switching interface (PS) (n = 20). The control group comprised a soft tissue level (STL) neck design exhibiting a hydrophobic machined surface with a matching butt‐joint interface (n = 41). Standardized clinical, radiologic, and esthetic parameters were applied. The facial bone crest dimensions were assessed by CBCT.
Results
Soft tissue parameters and pink esthetic scores yielded no significant differences between the two designs. Major differences were only observed at the implant shoulder level. The height of the facial bone crest for the BL design was located 0.2 mm above the implant shoulder level, whereas for the STL design, its location was 1.6 mm below. The width of the peri‐implant saucer‐like bone defect was reduced by 40% for the BL implant design. No differences were observed 2 mm below the shoulder level.
Conclusions
The results of this comparative study suggest better crestal bone stability on the facial aspect of single implant sites in the esthetic zone for a BL design with a platform‐switching concept when compared with STL implants with a butt‐joint interface.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0905-7161</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1600-0501</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/clr.12692</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26370904</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Denmark: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Alveolar Bone Loss - diagnostic imaging ; Alveolar Bone Loss - etiology ; Alveolar Bone Loss - prevention & control ; Alveolar Process - anatomy & histology ; Alveolar Process - diagnostic imaging ; Alveolar Process - surgery ; bone loss ; bone regeneration ; bone remodeling ; bone resorption ; Cone-Beam Computed Tomography ; dental implant-abutment design ; Dental Implantation, Endosseous - adverse effects ; Dental Implantation, Endosseous - methods ; dental implants ; Dental Implants, Single-Tooth ; Dental Prosthesis Design ; Dentistry ; Esthetics, Dental ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Clinical oral implants research, 2016-09, Vol.27 (9), p.1055-1064</ispartof><rights>2015 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd</rights><rights>2015 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5362-55c811c5a3fd327cd4afb6580850314caad2d99f21c65f7521c49f5eee670bae3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5362-55c811c5a3fd327cd4afb6580850314caad2d99f21c65f7521c49f5eee670bae3</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%2Fclr.12692$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fclr.12692$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26370904$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chappuis, Vivianne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bornstein, Michael M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buser, Daniel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Belser, Urs</creatorcontrib><title>Influence of implant neck design on facial bone crest dimensions in the esthetic zone analyzed by cone beam CT: a comparative study with a 5-to-9-year follow-up</title><title>Clinical oral implants research</title><addtitle>Clin. Oral Impl. Res</addtitle><description>Aim
To examine the influence of two different neck designs on facial bone crest dimensions in esthetic single implant sites after a 5‐to‐9‐year follow‐up analyzed by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).
Materials and methods
Sixty‐one patients with an implant‐borne single crown following early implant placement in the esthetic zone were enrolled. The test group consisted of a bone level (BL) neck design exhibiting a hydrophilic micro‐rough surface combined with a platform‐switching interface (PS) (n = 20). The control group comprised a soft tissue level (STL) neck design exhibiting a hydrophobic machined surface with a matching butt‐joint interface (n = 41). Standardized clinical, radiologic, and esthetic parameters were applied. The facial bone crest dimensions were assessed by CBCT.
Results
Soft tissue parameters and pink esthetic scores yielded no significant differences between the two designs. Major differences were only observed at the implant shoulder level. The height of the facial bone crest for the BL design was located 0.2 mm above the implant shoulder level, whereas for the STL design, its location was 1.6 mm below. The width of the peri‐implant saucer‐like bone defect was reduced by 40% for the BL implant design. No differences were observed 2 mm below the shoulder level.
Conclusions
The results of this comparative study suggest better crestal bone stability on the facial aspect of single implant sites in the esthetic zone for a BL design with a platform‐switching concept when compared with STL implants with a butt‐joint interface.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Alveolar Bone Loss - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Alveolar Bone Loss - etiology</subject><subject>Alveolar Bone Loss - prevention & control</subject><subject>Alveolar Process - anatomy & histology</subject><subject>Alveolar Process - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Alveolar Process - surgery</subject><subject>bone loss</subject><subject>bone regeneration</subject><subject>bone remodeling</subject><subject>bone resorption</subject><subject>Cone-Beam Computed Tomography</subject><subject>dental implant-abutment design</subject><subject>Dental Implantation, Endosseous - adverse effects</subject><subject>Dental Implantation, Endosseous - methods</subject><subject>dental implants</subject><subject>Dental Implants, Single-Tooth</subject><subject>Dental Prosthesis Design</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Esthetics, Dental</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0905-7161</issn><issn>1600-0501</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkcFu1DAQhiMEotvCgRdAPsLBrR3HTsINraC0rIqoijhajjNmTR17ayds06fhUfGybW9IzGU0M9_80sxfFK8oOaY5TrSLx7QUbfmkWFBBCCac0KfFgrSE45oKelAcpvSTECLapn1eHJSC1XlYLYrfZ964CbwGFAyyw8YpPyIP-hr1kOwPj4JHRmmrHOqCB6QjpBH1dgCfbPAJWY_GNaDcXcNoNbrbUcorN99Bj7oZ6V2jAzWg5dU7pHI9bFRUo_0FKI1TP6OtHdd5wPEYcItnUBGZ4FzY4mnzonhmlEvw8j4fFd8-frhafsKrL6dny_crrDkTJeZcN5RqrpjpWVnrvlKmE7whDSeMVlqpvuzb1pRUC25qnnPVGg4AoiadAnZUvNnrbmK4mfI1crBJg8v_gDAlSZuybhrCGf8PlArBGs6qjL7dozqGlCIYuYl2UHGWlMiddzJ7J_96l9nX97JTN0D_SD6YlYGTPbC1DuZ_K8nl6vJBEu83bBrh9nFDxWspalZz-f3iVJ5X5-3nrxeXkrI_dc6zJw</recordid><startdate>201609</startdate><enddate>201609</enddate><creator>Chappuis, Vivianne</creator><creator>Bornstein, Michael M.</creator><creator>Buser, Daniel</creator><creator>Belser, Urs</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>201609</creationdate><title>Influence of implant neck design on facial bone crest dimensions in the esthetic zone analyzed by cone beam CT: a comparative study with a 5-to-9-year follow-up</title><author>Chappuis, Vivianne ; Bornstein, Michael M. ; Buser, Daniel ; Belser, Urs</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5362-55c811c5a3fd327cd4afb6580850314caad2d99f21c65f7521c49f5eee670bae3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Alveolar Bone Loss - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Alveolar Bone Loss - etiology</topic><topic>Alveolar Bone Loss - prevention & control</topic><topic>Alveolar Process - anatomy & histology</topic><topic>Alveolar Process - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Alveolar Process - surgery</topic><topic>bone loss</topic><topic>bone regeneration</topic><topic>bone remodeling</topic><topic>bone resorption</topic><topic>Cone-Beam Computed Tomography</topic><topic>dental implant-abutment design</topic><topic>Dental Implantation, Endosseous - adverse effects</topic><topic>Dental Implantation, Endosseous - methods</topic><topic>dental implants</topic><topic>Dental Implants, Single-Tooth</topic><topic>Dental Prosthesis Design</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Esthetics, Dental</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chappuis, Vivianne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bornstein, Michael M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buser, Daniel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Belser, Urs</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 & 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>Chappuis, Vivianne</au><au>Bornstein, Michael M.</au><au>Buser, Daniel</au><au>Belser, Urs</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Influence of implant neck design on facial bone crest dimensions in the esthetic zone analyzed by cone beam CT: a comparative study with a 5-to-9-year follow-up</atitle><jtitle>Clinical oral implants research</jtitle><addtitle>Clin. Oral Impl. Res</addtitle><date>2016-09</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>27</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>1055</spage><epage>1064</epage><pages>1055-1064</pages><issn>0905-7161</issn><eissn>1600-0501</eissn><abstract>Aim
To examine the influence of two different neck designs on facial bone crest dimensions in esthetic single implant sites after a 5‐to‐9‐year follow‐up analyzed by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).
Materials and methods
Sixty‐one patients with an implant‐borne single crown following early implant placement in the esthetic zone were enrolled. The test group consisted of a bone level (BL) neck design exhibiting a hydrophilic micro‐rough surface combined with a platform‐switching interface (PS) (n = 20). The control group comprised a soft tissue level (STL) neck design exhibiting a hydrophobic machined surface with a matching butt‐joint interface (n = 41). Standardized clinical, radiologic, and esthetic parameters were applied. The facial bone crest dimensions were assessed by CBCT.
Results
Soft tissue parameters and pink esthetic scores yielded no significant differences between the two designs. Major differences were only observed at the implant shoulder level. The height of the facial bone crest for the BL design was located 0.2 mm above the implant shoulder level, whereas for the STL design, its location was 1.6 mm below. The width of the peri‐implant saucer‐like bone defect was reduced by 40% for the BL implant design. No differences were observed 2 mm below the shoulder level.
Conclusions
The results of this comparative study suggest better crestal bone stability on the facial aspect of single implant sites in the esthetic zone for a BL design with a platform‐switching concept when compared with STL implants with a butt‐joint interface.</abstract><cop>Denmark</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>26370904</pmid><doi>10.1111/clr.12692</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0905-7161 |
ispartof | Clinical oral implants research, 2016-09, Vol.27 (9), p.1055-1064 |
issn | 0905-7161 1600-0501 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1827880535 |
source | MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
subjects | Adult Aged Alveolar Bone Loss - diagnostic imaging Alveolar Bone Loss - etiology Alveolar Bone Loss - prevention & control Alveolar Process - anatomy & histology Alveolar Process - diagnostic imaging Alveolar Process - surgery bone loss bone regeneration bone remodeling bone resorption Cone-Beam Computed Tomography dental implant-abutment design Dental Implantation, Endosseous - adverse effects Dental Implantation, Endosseous - methods dental implants Dental Implants, Single-Tooth Dental Prosthesis Design Dentistry Esthetics, Dental Female Follow-Up Studies Humans Male Middle Aged Young Adult |
title | Influence of implant neck design on facial bone crest dimensions in the esthetic zone analyzed by cone beam CT: a comparative study with a 5-to-9-year follow-up |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-03T16%3A08%3A04IST&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=Influence%20of%20implant%20neck%20design%20on%20facial%20bone%20crest%20dimensions%20in%20the%20esthetic%20zone%20analyzed%20by%20cone%20beam%20CT:%20a%20comparative%20study%20with%20a%205-to-9-year%20follow-up&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20oral%20implants%20research&rft.au=Chappuis,%20Vivianne&rft.date=2016-09&rft.volume=27&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=1055&rft.epage=1064&rft.pages=1055-1064&rft.issn=0905-7161&rft.eissn=1600-0501&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/clr.12692&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1816638534%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=1816638534&rft_id=info:pmid/26370904&rfr_iscdi=true |