TY - JOUR
T1 - Bone respones to loaded implants with non-matching implant-abutment diameters in the canine mandible
AU - Cochran, David L.
AU - Bosshardt, Dieter D.
AU - Grize, Leticia
AU - Hlgginbottom, Frank L.
AU - Jones, Archie A.
AU - Jung, Ronald E.
AU - Wieland, Marco
AU - Dard, Michel
PY - 2009/4
Y1 - 2009/4
N2 - Background: One way to evaluate various implant restorations is to mea-sure the amount of bone change that occurs at the crestal bone. The objective of this study was to histologically evaluate the alveolar bone change around a bone-level, non-matching implant-abutment diameter configuration that incorporated a horizontal offset and a Morse taper internal connection. Methods: The study design included extraction of all mandibular premolars and first molars in five canines. After 3 months, 12 dental implants were placed at three levels in each dog: even with the alveolar crest, 1 mm above the alveolar crest, and 1 mm below the alveolar crest. The implants were submerged on one side of the mandible. On the other side, healing abutments were exposed to the oral cavity (non-submerged). Gold crowns were attached 2 months after implant placement. The dogs were sacrificed 8 months postioading, and specimens were processed for histologic and histometric analyses. Results: Evaluation of the specimens indicated that the marginal bone remained near the top of the implants under submerged and non-submerged conditions. The amount of bone change for submerged implants placed even with, 1 mm below, and 1 mm above the alveolar crest was -0.34,-1.29. and 0.04 mm, respectively (negative values indicate bone loss). For non-submerged implants, the respective values were -0.38, -1.13, and 0.19 mm. For submerged and non-submerged implants, there were significant differences in the amount of bone change among the three groups (P<0.05). The percentage of bone-to-implant contact for submerged implants was 73.3%, 71.8%, and 71.5%. For non-submerged implants, the respective numbers were 73.2%, 74.5%, and 76%. No significant differences occurred with regard to the percentage of bone contact. Conclusions: Minimal histologic bone loss occurred when dental implants with non-matching implant-abutment diameters were placed at the bone crest and were loaded for 6 months in the canine. The bone loss was significantly less (five- to six-fold) than that reported for bone-level implants with matching implant-abutment diameters (butt-joint connections).
AB - Background: One way to evaluate various implant restorations is to mea-sure the amount of bone change that occurs at the crestal bone. The objective of this study was to histologically evaluate the alveolar bone change around a bone-level, non-matching implant-abutment diameter configuration that incorporated a horizontal offset and a Morse taper internal connection. Methods: The study design included extraction of all mandibular premolars and first molars in five canines. After 3 months, 12 dental implants were placed at three levels in each dog: even with the alveolar crest, 1 mm above the alveolar crest, and 1 mm below the alveolar crest. The implants were submerged on one side of the mandible. On the other side, healing abutments were exposed to the oral cavity (non-submerged). Gold crowns were attached 2 months after implant placement. The dogs were sacrificed 8 months postioading, and specimens were processed for histologic and histometric analyses. Results: Evaluation of the specimens indicated that the marginal bone remained near the top of the implants under submerged and non-submerged conditions. The amount of bone change for submerged implants placed even with, 1 mm below, and 1 mm above the alveolar crest was -0.34,-1.29. and 0.04 mm, respectively (negative values indicate bone loss). For non-submerged implants, the respective values were -0.38, -1.13, and 0.19 mm. For submerged and non-submerged implants, there were significant differences in the amount of bone change among the three groups (P<0.05). The percentage of bone-to-implant contact for submerged implants was 73.3%, 71.8%, and 71.5%. For non-submerged implants, the respective numbers were 73.2%, 74.5%, and 76%. No significant differences occurred with regard to the percentage of bone contact. Conclusions: Minimal histologic bone loss occurred when dental implants with non-matching implant-abutment diameters were placed at the bone crest and were loaded for 6 months in the canine. The bone loss was significantly less (five- to six-fold) than that reported for bone-level implants with matching implant-abutment diameters (butt-joint connections).
KW - Animal studies
KW - Bone loss
KW - Dental implants
KW - Histology
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=63849220073&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=63849220073&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1902/jop.2009.080323
DO - 10.1902/jop.2009.080323
M3 - Article
C2 - 19335081
AN - SCOPUS:63849220073
SN - 0022-3492
VL - 80
SP - 609
EP - 617
JO - Journal of periodontology
JF - Journal of periodontology
IS - 4
ER -