Long-term effect of implant-abutment connection type on marginal bone loss and survival of dental implants.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Young-Min Kim, Jong-Bin Lee, Heung-Sik Um, Beom-Seok Chang, Jae-Kwan Lee
{"title":"Long-term effect of implant-abutment connection type on marginal bone loss and survival of dental implants.","authors":"Young-Min Kim,&nbsp;Jong-Bin Lee,&nbsp;Heung-Sik Um,&nbsp;Beom-Seok Chang,&nbsp;Jae-Kwan Lee","doi":"10.5051/jpis.2200960048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to compare the long-term survival rate and peri-implant marginal bone loss between different types of dental implant-abutment connections.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Implants with external or internal abutment connections, which were fitted at Gangneung-Wonju National University Dental Hospital from November 2011 to December 2015 and followed up for >5 years, were retrospectively investigated. Cumulative survival rates were evaluated for >5 years, and peri-implant marginal bone loss was evaluated at 1- and 5-year follow-up examinations after functional loading.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 8-year cumulative survival rates were 93.3% and 90.7% in the external and internal connection types, respectively (<i>P</i>=0.353). The mean values of marginal bone loss were 1.23 mm (external) and 0.72 mm (internal) (<i>P</i><0.001) after 1 year of loading, and 1.20 mm and 1.00 mm for external and internal abutment connections, respectively (<i>P=</i>0.137) after 5 years. Implant length (longer, <i>P</i>=0.018), smoking status (heavy, <i>P</i>=0.001), and prosthetic type (bridge, <i>P</i>=0.004) were associated with significantly greater marginal bone loss, and the use of screw-cement-retained prosthesis was significantly associated (<i>P</i>=0.027) with less marginal bone loss.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There was no significant difference in the cumulative survival rate between implants with external and internal abutment connections. After 1 year of loading, marginal bone loss was greater around the implants with an external abutment connection. However, no significant difference between the external and internal connection groups was found after 5 years. Both types of abutment connections are viable treatment options for the reconstruction of partially edentulous ridges.</p>","PeriodicalId":48795,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/03/de/jpis-52-496.PMC9807847.pdf","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2200960048","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the long-term survival rate and peri-implant marginal bone loss between different types of dental implant-abutment connections.

Methods: Implants with external or internal abutment connections, which were fitted at Gangneung-Wonju National University Dental Hospital from November 2011 to December 2015 and followed up for >5 years, were retrospectively investigated. Cumulative survival rates were evaluated for >5 years, and peri-implant marginal bone loss was evaluated at 1- and 5-year follow-up examinations after functional loading.

Results: The 8-year cumulative survival rates were 93.3% and 90.7% in the external and internal connection types, respectively (P=0.353). The mean values of marginal bone loss were 1.23 mm (external) and 0.72 mm (internal) (P<0.001) after 1 year of loading, and 1.20 mm and 1.00 mm for external and internal abutment connections, respectively (P=0.137) after 5 years. Implant length (longer, P=0.018), smoking status (heavy, P=0.001), and prosthetic type (bridge, P=0.004) were associated with significantly greater marginal bone loss, and the use of screw-cement-retained prosthesis was significantly associated (P=0.027) with less marginal bone loss.

Conclusions: There was no significant difference in the cumulative survival rate between implants with external and internal abutment connections. After 1 year of loading, marginal bone loss was greater around the implants with an external abutment connection. However, no significant difference between the external and internal connection groups was found after 5 years. Both types of abutment connections are viable treatment options for the reconstruction of partially edentulous ridges.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

种植体-基台连接方式对种植体边缘骨流失及存活的长期影响。
目的:本研究旨在比较不同种植体-基牙连接方式的长期存活率和种植体周围边缘骨流失情况。方法:对2011年11月~ 2015年12月在江陵原州大学口腔医院安装的种植体进行回顾性分析,随访5年以上。评估>5年的累积生存率,并在功能负荷后的1年和5年随访检查中评估种植体周围边缘骨丢失。结果:外接型和内接型的8年累积生存率分别为93.3%和90.7% (P=0.353)。5年后边缘骨丢失平均值为1.23 mm(外)和0.72 mm(内)(PP=0.137)。种植体长度(较长,P=0.018)、吸烟状况(重度,P=0.001)和假体类型(桥体,P=0.004)与更大的边缘骨丢失相关,而使用螺钉水泥保留假体与更小的边缘骨丢失显著相关(P=0.027)。结论:内、外基牙种植体的累积成活率无显著性差异。加载1年后,外基台连接种植体周围边缘骨丢失更大。然而,5年后,外部连接组和内部连接组之间没有明显差异。两种类型的基台连接是重建部分无牙脊的可行治疗选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.30%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Journal of Periodontal & Implant Science (JPIS) is a peer-reviewed and open-access journal providing up-to-date information relevant to professionalism of periodontology and dental implantology. JPIS is dedicated to global and extensive publication which includes evidence-based original articles, and fundamental reviews in order to cover a variety of interests in the field of periodontal as well as implant science.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信