Evaluation of Periodontal Pocket Depth around Single Tooth Implant with Cement and Screw-retained Implant Prosthesis

M. A. Rahman, S. Zaman, C. Das, M. A. Hossain, F. Tauhid, Md. Humayun Kabir, Md. Amzad Hossain
{"title":"Evaluation of Periodontal Pocket Depth around Single Tooth Implant with Cement and Screw-retained Implant Prosthesis","authors":"M. A. Rahman, S. Zaman, C. Das, M. A. Hossain, F. Tauhid, Md. Humayun Kabir, Md. Amzad Hossain","doi":"10.24018/ejdent.2022.3.5.218","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis clinical trial was planned to examine the long-standing clinical achievement of dental implants equipped either with cemented or screw-retained systems. A total of 100 teeth were selected based on the following inclusion criteria: should have a particular implant by means of cement and screw implant prosthesis, participants should have superior oral hygiene, non-alcoholic and non-smoker patients, and aged between 20 - 65 years. They were separated into two groups; 50 teeth were cemented (group A) and 50 by a screw (group B) system. At least 24 months evaluation was integrated to measure the periodontal pocket depth. Statistical analysis was done by using SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Science) where comparisons were assess by using the Chi-square test, Fisher's exact test; a P-value <0.05 was considered significant. It was found that at six months, periodontal pocket depth was increased in 2.0% of teeth in Group-A, but none in Group-B. Periodontal pocket depth increased significantly in group A (20%) at 12 months comparing to group B (4.0%). In the same way, at 18 and 24 months, teeth in group-A had significantly higher periodontal pockets (64.0% and 84.0%, respectively) than in group-B (8.0% and 32.0%, respectively). It can be stated that comparing to the cemented implant, the screw implant prosthesis perform better in terms of their periodontal pocket depth.\n","PeriodicalId":197045,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Dental and Oral Health","volume":"172 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Dental and Oral Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24018/ejdent.2022.3.5.218","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This clinical trial was planned to examine the long-standing clinical achievement of dental implants equipped either with cemented or screw-retained systems. A total of 100 teeth were selected based on the following inclusion criteria: should have a particular implant by means of cement and screw implant prosthesis, participants should have superior oral hygiene, non-alcoholic and non-smoker patients, and aged between 20 - 65 years. They were separated into two groups; 50 teeth were cemented (group A) and 50 by a screw (group B) system. At least 24 months evaluation was integrated to measure the periodontal pocket depth. Statistical analysis was done by using SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Science) where comparisons were assess by using the Chi-square test, Fisher's exact test; a P-value <0.05 was considered significant. It was found that at six months, periodontal pocket depth was increased in 2.0% of teeth in Group-A, but none in Group-B. Periodontal pocket depth increased significantly in group A (20%) at 12 months comparing to group B (4.0%). In the same way, at 18 and 24 months, teeth in group-A had significantly higher periodontal pockets (64.0% and 84.0%, respectively) than in group-B (8.0% and 32.0%, respectively). It can be stated that comparing to the cemented implant, the screw implant prosthesis perform better in terms of their periodontal pocket depth.
单牙种植体骨水泥与螺钉固定种植体修复的牙周袋深度评价
本临床试验计划检查牙种植体配备骨水泥或螺钉保留系统的长期临床成果。根据以下入选标准,共选择100颗牙齿:应采用特定的种植体,采用骨水泥和螺钉种植体修复,参与者应具有良好的口腔卫生,非酒精和非吸烟者,年龄在20 - 65岁之间。他们被分成两组;50颗牙采用骨水泥(A组),50颗牙采用螺钉系统(B组)。结合至少24个月的评估来测量牙周袋深度。使用SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Science)进行统计分析,其中使用卡方检验(Fisher精确检验)评估比较;p值<0.05为显著性。6个月时,a组牙周袋深度增加2.0%,而b组牙周袋深度没有增加。与B组(4.0%)相比,A组12个月时牙周袋深度显著增加(20%)。同样,在18个月和24个月时,a组的牙周袋率分别为64.0%和84.0%,明显高于b组(8.0%和32.0%)。可见,与骨水泥种植体相比,螺钉种植体在牙周袋深度方面表现更好。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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