Marginal Bone Level Evaluation after Functional Loading Around Two Different Dental Implant Designs
Purpose. To investigate peri-implant alveolar bone changes using periapical radiographs before and after prosthetic delivery in submerged and nonsubmerged dental implants. Methods. Digital periapical films of 60 ITI Straumann nonsubmerged dental implants and 60 Xive Dentsply submerged dental implant...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | BioMed research international 2016-01, Vol.2016 (2016), p.1-6 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 6 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2016 |
container_start_page | 1 |
container_title | BioMed research international |
container_volume | 2016 |
creator | Lee, Sheng-Yang Lin, Hsi-Kuai Salamanca, Eisner Ho, Ko-Ning Chang, Wei-Jen |
description | Purpose. To investigate peri-implant alveolar bone changes using periapical radiographs before and after prosthetic delivery in submerged and nonsubmerged dental implants. Methods. Digital periapical films of 60 ITI Straumann nonsubmerged dental implants and 60 Xive Dentsply submerged dental implants were taken before, immediately after, and 12 and 24 weeks after the prosthetic restoration was delivered. Results. The 60-nonsubmerged dental implant group showed mean marginal bone resorption at baseline of 0.10 ± 0.23 mm and 24 weeks later, marginal bone resorption was 0.16 ± 0.25 mm. The submerged dental implant group showed a significantly higher distal marginal bone resorption over the mesial side. Mean marginal bone resorption at baseline was 0.16 ± 0.32 on the mesial and 0.41 ± 0.56 on the distal side. Twenty-four weeks later, it was 0.69 ± 0.69 mm on the mesial and 0.99 ± 0.90 mm on the distal side. Conclusion. First, it was possible to determine that submerged implants had a higher mean marginal bone resorption and less bone-to-implant contact than nonsubmerged implants. And second, the distal side of submerged dental implants presented higher marginal bone loss than the mesial side. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1155/2016/1472090 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5143686</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A520714451</galeid><sourcerecordid>A520714451</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c532t-381fb431da699d2b6e2a7ab9fd2b711ad7164c52efc3495c79117654d81591793</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkUtvEzEUhS0EolXpjjUaiQ0SDfUdv8YbpNAHVErFpqwtx2NPXU3sYM-k6r-vpwmhsKoX9r3yp-NzfRB6D_gLAGOnNQZ-ClTUWOJX6LAmQGccKLze14QcoOOc73BZDXAs-Vt0UAsppWjkITLXOnU-6L76FoOtFnZj--pio_tRDz6GSrvBpupyDGZqC7aIuvWhq-YpjqGtbu5jde6ds8mGoTovW2GuVuteP7XZdyG_Q2-c7rM93p1H6Nflxc3Zj9ni5_ers_liZhiphxlpwC0pgVZzKdt6yW2thV5KV2oBoFsBnBpWW2cIlcwICSA4o20DTIKQ5Ah93equx-XKtqaYSbpX6-RXOj2oqL369yb4W9XFjWJACW94Efi0E0jx92jzoFY-G9uXYWwcs4KGN4RAQ2hBP_6H3sUxlQ-aKMpx8YWbv1Sne6t8cLG8ayZRNWc1FkApg0KdbCmTYs7Jur1lwGqKWU0xq13MBf_wfMw9_CfUAnzeArc-tPrev1DOFsY6_YyWvKiRR0NTt4c</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1846065408</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Marginal Bone Level Evaluation after Functional Loading Around Two Different Dental Implant Designs</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Lee, Sheng-Yang ; Lin, Hsi-Kuai ; Salamanca, Eisner ; Ho, Ko-Ning ; Chang, Wei-Jen</creator><contributor>Tüzüner, Tamer</contributor><creatorcontrib>Lee, Sheng-Yang ; Lin, Hsi-Kuai ; Salamanca, Eisner ; Ho, Ko-Ning ; Chang, Wei-Jen ; Tüzüner, Tamer</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose. To investigate peri-implant alveolar bone changes using periapical radiographs before and after prosthetic delivery in submerged and nonsubmerged dental implants. Methods. Digital periapical films of 60 ITI Straumann nonsubmerged dental implants and 60 Xive Dentsply submerged dental implants were taken before, immediately after, and 12 and 24 weeks after the prosthetic restoration was delivered. Results. The 60-nonsubmerged dental implant group showed mean marginal bone resorption at baseline of 0.10 ± 0.23 mm and 24 weeks later, marginal bone resorption was 0.16 ± 0.25 mm. The submerged dental implant group showed a significantly higher distal marginal bone resorption over the mesial side. Mean marginal bone resorption at baseline was 0.16 ± 0.32 on the mesial and 0.41 ± 0.56 on the distal side. Twenty-four weeks later, it was 0.69 ± 0.69 mm on the mesial and 0.99 ± 0.90 mm on the distal side. Conclusion. First, it was possible to determine that submerged implants had a higher mean marginal bone resorption and less bone-to-implant contact than nonsubmerged implants. And second, the distal side of submerged dental implants presented higher marginal bone loss than the mesial side.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2314-6133</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2314-6141</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1155/2016/1472090</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27999789</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cairo, Egypt: Hindawi Publishing Corporation</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Alveolar Bone Loss - etiology ; Alveolar Bone Loss - pathology ; Alveolar Bone Loss - physiopathology ; Biomedical research ; Bone-Implant Interface - pathology ; Bone-Implant Interface - physiopathology ; Dental Implants - adverse effects ; Dental Prosthesis Design - adverse effects ; Design and construction ; Female ; Humans ; Implant dentures ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Patient outcomes ; Retrospective Studies</subject><ispartof>BioMed research international, 2016-01, Vol.2016 (2016), p.1-6</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2016 Ko-Ning Ho et al.</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2016 Ko-Ning Ho et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2016 Ko-Ning Ho et al. 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c532t-381fb431da699d2b6e2a7ab9fd2b711ad7164c52efc3495c79117654d81591793</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c532t-381fb431da699d2b6e2a7ab9fd2b711ad7164c52efc3495c79117654d81591793</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-3006-8068 ; 0000-0002-6637-4430</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5143686/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5143686/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27999789$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Tüzüner, Tamer</contributor><creatorcontrib>Lee, Sheng-Yang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lin, Hsi-Kuai</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salamanca, Eisner</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ho, Ko-Ning</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chang, Wei-Jen</creatorcontrib><title>Marginal Bone Level Evaluation after Functional Loading Around Two Different Dental Implant Designs</title><title>BioMed research international</title><addtitle>Biomed Res Int</addtitle><description>Purpose. To investigate peri-implant alveolar bone changes using periapical radiographs before and after prosthetic delivery in submerged and nonsubmerged dental implants. Methods. Digital periapical films of 60 ITI Straumann nonsubmerged dental implants and 60 Xive Dentsply submerged dental implants were taken before, immediately after, and 12 and 24 weeks after the prosthetic restoration was delivered. Results. The 60-nonsubmerged dental implant group showed mean marginal bone resorption at baseline of 0.10 ± 0.23 mm and 24 weeks later, marginal bone resorption was 0.16 ± 0.25 mm. The submerged dental implant group showed a significantly higher distal marginal bone resorption over the mesial side. Mean marginal bone resorption at baseline was 0.16 ± 0.32 on the mesial and 0.41 ± 0.56 on the distal side. Twenty-four weeks later, it was 0.69 ± 0.69 mm on the mesial and 0.99 ± 0.90 mm on the distal side. Conclusion. First, it was possible to determine that submerged implants had a higher mean marginal bone resorption and less bone-to-implant contact than nonsubmerged implants. And second, the distal side of submerged dental implants presented higher marginal bone loss than the mesial side.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Alveolar Bone Loss - etiology</subject><subject>Alveolar Bone Loss - pathology</subject><subject>Alveolar Bone Loss - physiopathology</subject><subject>Biomedical research</subject><subject>Bone-Implant Interface - pathology</subject><subject>Bone-Implant Interface - physiopathology</subject><subject>Dental Implants - adverse effects</subject><subject>Dental Prosthesis Design - adverse effects</subject><subject>Design and construction</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Implant dentures</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Patient outcomes</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><issn>2314-6133</issn><issn>2314-6141</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>RHX</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkUtvEzEUhS0EolXpjjUaiQ0SDfUdv8YbpNAHVErFpqwtx2NPXU3sYM-k6r-vpwmhsKoX9r3yp-NzfRB6D_gLAGOnNQZ-ClTUWOJX6LAmQGccKLze14QcoOOc73BZDXAs-Vt0UAsppWjkITLXOnU-6L76FoOtFnZj--pio_tRDz6GSrvBpupyDGZqC7aIuvWhq-YpjqGtbu5jde6ds8mGoTovW2GuVuteP7XZdyG_Q2-c7rM93p1H6Nflxc3Zj9ni5_ers_liZhiphxlpwC0pgVZzKdt6yW2thV5KV2oBoFsBnBpWW2cIlcwICSA4o20DTIKQ5Ah93equx-XKtqaYSbpX6-RXOj2oqL369yb4W9XFjWJACW94Efi0E0jx92jzoFY-G9uXYWwcs4KGN4RAQ2hBP_6H3sUxlQ-aKMpx8YWbv1Sne6t8cLG8ayZRNWc1FkApg0KdbCmTYs7Jur1lwGqKWU0xq13MBf_wfMw9_CfUAnzeArc-tPrev1DOFsY6_YyWvKiRR0NTt4c</recordid><startdate>20160101</startdate><enddate>20160101</enddate><creator>Lee, Sheng-Yang</creator><creator>Lin, Hsi-Kuai</creator><creator>Salamanca, Eisner</creator><creator>Ho, Ko-Ning</creator><creator>Chang, Wei-Jen</creator><general>Hindawi Publishing Corporation</general><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><general>Hindawi Limited</general><scope>ADJCN</scope><scope>AHFXO</scope><scope>RHU</scope><scope>RHW</scope><scope>RHX</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>3V.</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CWDGH</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3006-8068</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6637-4430</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20160101</creationdate><title>Marginal Bone Level Evaluation after Functional Loading Around Two Different Dental Implant Designs</title><author>Lee, Sheng-Yang ; Lin, Hsi-Kuai ; Salamanca, Eisner ; Ho, Ko-Ning ; Chang, Wei-Jen</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c532t-381fb431da699d2b6e2a7ab9fd2b711ad7164c52efc3495c79117654d81591793</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Alveolar Bone Loss - etiology</topic><topic>Alveolar Bone Loss - pathology</topic><topic>Alveolar Bone Loss - physiopathology</topic><topic>Biomedical research</topic><topic>Bone-Implant Interface - pathology</topic><topic>Bone-Implant Interface - physiopathology</topic><topic>Dental Implants - adverse effects</topic><topic>Dental Prosthesis Design - adverse effects</topic><topic>Design and construction</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Implant dentures</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Patient outcomes</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lee, Sheng-Yang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lin, Hsi-Kuai</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salamanca, Eisner</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ho, Ko-Ning</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chang, Wei-Jen</creatorcontrib><collection>الدوريات العلمية والإحصائية - e-Marefa Academic and Statistical Periodicals</collection><collection>معرفة - المحتوى العربي الأكاديمي المتكامل - e-Marefa Academic Complete</collection><collection>Hindawi Publishing Complete</collection><collection>Hindawi Publishing Subscription Journals</collection><collection>Hindawi Publishing Open Access Journals</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Middle East & Africa Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>BioMed research international</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lee, Sheng-Yang</au><au>Lin, Hsi-Kuai</au><au>Salamanca, Eisner</au><au>Ho, Ko-Ning</au><au>Chang, Wei-Jen</au><au>Tüzüner, Tamer</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Marginal Bone Level Evaluation after Functional Loading Around Two Different Dental Implant Designs</atitle><jtitle>BioMed research international</jtitle><addtitle>Biomed Res Int</addtitle><date>2016-01-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>2016</volume><issue>2016</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>6</epage><pages>1-6</pages><issn>2314-6133</issn><eissn>2314-6141</eissn><abstract>Purpose. To investigate peri-implant alveolar bone changes using periapical radiographs before and after prosthetic delivery in submerged and nonsubmerged dental implants. Methods. Digital periapical films of 60 ITI Straumann nonsubmerged dental implants and 60 Xive Dentsply submerged dental implants were taken before, immediately after, and 12 and 24 weeks after the prosthetic restoration was delivered. Results. The 60-nonsubmerged dental implant group showed mean marginal bone resorption at baseline of 0.10 ± 0.23 mm and 24 weeks later, marginal bone resorption was 0.16 ± 0.25 mm. The submerged dental implant group showed a significantly higher distal marginal bone resorption over the mesial side. Mean marginal bone resorption at baseline was 0.16 ± 0.32 on the mesial and 0.41 ± 0.56 on the distal side. Twenty-four weeks later, it was 0.69 ± 0.69 mm on the mesial and 0.99 ± 0.90 mm on the distal side. Conclusion. First, it was possible to determine that submerged implants had a higher mean marginal bone resorption and less bone-to-implant contact than nonsubmerged implants. And second, the distal side of submerged dental implants presented higher marginal bone loss than the mesial side.</abstract><cop>Cairo, Egypt</cop><pub>Hindawi Publishing Corporation</pub><pmid>27999789</pmid><doi>10.1155/2016/1472090</doi><tpages>6</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3006-8068</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6637-4430</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2314-6133 |
ispartof | BioMed research international, 2016-01, Vol.2016 (2016), p.1-6 |
issn | 2314-6133 2314-6141 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5143686 |
source | MEDLINE; PubMed Central Open Access; Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection); PubMed Central; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Adult Aged Alveolar Bone Loss - etiology Alveolar Bone Loss - pathology Alveolar Bone Loss - physiopathology Biomedical research Bone-Implant Interface - pathology Bone-Implant Interface - physiopathology Dental Implants - adverse effects Dental Prosthesis Design - adverse effects Design and construction Female Humans Implant dentures Male Middle Aged Patient outcomes Retrospective Studies |
title | Marginal Bone Level Evaluation after Functional Loading Around Two Different Dental Implant Designs |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T00%3A42%3A58IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Marginal%20Bone%20Level%20Evaluation%20after%20Functional%20Loading%20Around%20Two%20Different%20Dental%20Implant%20Designs&rft.jtitle=BioMed%20research%20international&rft.au=Lee,%20Sheng-Yang&rft.date=2016-01-01&rft.volume=2016&rft.issue=2016&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=6&rft.pages=1-6&rft.issn=2314-6133&rft.eissn=2314-6141&rft_id=info:doi/10.1155/2016/1472090&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA520714451%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1846065408&rft_id=info:pmid/27999789&rft_galeid=A520714451&rfr_iscdi=true |