Piyush Javiya, Kandra Rajakumari, Sravya Gorrepati, Donka Srilakshmi, Manawar Ahmad Mansoor, Hina Naim Abdul, Fawaz Abdul Hamid Baig
{"title":"Single-Piece Implant Systems and its Longterm Stability: An Evaluative Research.","authors":"Piyush Javiya, Kandra Rajakumari, Sravya Gorrepati, Donka Srilakshmi, Manawar Ahmad Mansoor, Hina Naim Abdul, Fawaz Abdul Hamid Baig","doi":"10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_399_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this research was to compare the longstanding stability of single-piece implant systems to typical two-piece systems by analyzing patient records retrospectively.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective examination of patient records from January 2010 to December 2020 was undertaken at the Department of Oral Implantology, University Hospital. The research included dental rehabilitation patients who got single- or two-piece implant systems. Patient demographics, implant features, surgical procedures, and follow-up results were extracted. Implant success rates, stability defined by resonance frequency analysis (RFA) utilizing Osstell ISQ®, and peri-implant bone loss evaluated by standardized periapical radiographs at baseline and follow-up visits were the main outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The research involved 320 patients (160 per cohort). The average patient age was 52.7 years, with 55% men. The mandibular region received 65% of implants, and the maxillary region the rest. Single-piece cohort A had 94.6% implant success, and two-piece cohort B 96.2%. Implant success rates were similar between cohorts (<i>P</i> = 0.412). The mean ISQ scores were 72.4 ± 4.8 in cohort A and 74.8 ± 5.1 in cohort B (<i>P</i> = 0.086). Peri-implant bone loss was 1.8 ± 0.7 mm in cohort A and 1.4 ± 0.6 mm in cohort B (<i>P</i> = 0.031).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Single-piece implant systems provide a stable and successful alternative to classic two-piece systems. However, patient selection, surgical technique, and monitoring are essential to reduce peri-implant problems and improve clinical results. To improve implant dentistry patient care and evidence-based clinical practice, single-piece and two-piece implant systems' design, biomechanical features, and longstanding performance should be studied.</p>","PeriodicalId":94339,"journal":{"name":"Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences","volume":"16 Suppl 3","pages":"S2649-S2651"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11426815/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_399_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: The objective of this research was to compare the longstanding stability of single-piece implant systems to typical two-piece systems by analyzing patient records retrospectively.
Methods: A retrospective examination of patient records from January 2010 to December 2020 was undertaken at the Department of Oral Implantology, University Hospital. The research included dental rehabilitation patients who got single- or two-piece implant systems. Patient demographics, implant features, surgical procedures, and follow-up results were extracted. Implant success rates, stability defined by resonance frequency analysis (RFA) utilizing Osstell ISQ®, and peri-implant bone loss evaluated by standardized periapical radiographs at baseline and follow-up visits were the main outcomes.
Results: The research involved 320 patients (160 per cohort). The average patient age was 52.7 years, with 55% men. The mandibular region received 65% of implants, and the maxillary region the rest. Single-piece cohort A had 94.6% implant success, and two-piece cohort B 96.2%. Implant success rates were similar between cohorts (P = 0.412). The mean ISQ scores were 72.4 ± 4.8 in cohort A and 74.8 ± 5.1 in cohort B (P = 0.086). Peri-implant bone loss was 1.8 ± 0.7 mm in cohort A and 1.4 ± 0.6 mm in cohort B (P = 0.031).
Conclusion: Single-piece implant systems provide a stable and successful alternative to classic two-piece systems. However, patient selection, surgical technique, and monitoring are essential to reduce peri-implant problems and improve clinical results. To improve implant dentistry patient care and evidence-based clinical practice, single-piece and two-piece implant systems' design, biomechanical features, and longstanding performance should be studied.