Cosmin I Faur, Adrian Herman, Ionut Leahu, Sergiu Megiesan, Ionut Caluian
{"title":"Marginal Bone Loss Around the Implant: A Retrospective Analysis of Bone Remodeling Over Five Years of Follow-Up.","authors":"Cosmin I Faur, Adrian Herman, Ionut Leahu, Sergiu Megiesan, Ionut Caluian","doi":"10.7759/cureus.76228","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Bone remodeling around implants in implant-supported rehabilitation is a continuous debate with no consensus in the literature. This study aimed to investigate the implant- and patient-specific factors contributing to marginal bone loss near the implant.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We included patients who had implant-supported prosthetic rehabilitation using one implant system, between 2014 and 2018, who had full follow-up documentation and orthopantomography over five years, and who had no unwell-controlled systemic pathologies that may influence bone metabolism.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-one patients who received 500 implants met the inclusion criteria. We observed approximately 1 mm of bone resorption at the five-year follow-up, with the first 0.78 mm of them being documented at the three-year follow-up. Adults younger than 60 years old had an increase in bone resorption by approximately 30%. No difference was seen between men and women. However, a slight increase in bone resorption at five years was seen in female patients older than 50 years old than in ones younger than 50 years (by 30%). The narrowest diameter (3.5 mm; p = 0.001) and anterior mandible (p = 0.008) had the highest bone resorptions. Contrarily, with an insertion depth of approximately 1 mm (p = 0.004), the splinted implant prosthesis (p = 0.21) and zirconia material of the prosthesis (p = 0.57) had the lowest bone remodeling. Moreover, patients younger than 60 years and female patients above 50 years had an increased bone resorption.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Bone remodeling is a multifactorial process. The treatment planning has to take into consideration both implant- and patient-specific factors.</p>","PeriodicalId":93960,"journal":{"name":"Cureus","volume":"16 12","pages":"e76228"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11668266/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cureus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.76228","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Bone remodeling around implants in implant-supported rehabilitation is a continuous debate with no consensus in the literature. This study aimed to investigate the implant- and patient-specific factors contributing to marginal bone loss near the implant.
Materials and methods: We included patients who had implant-supported prosthetic rehabilitation using one implant system, between 2014 and 2018, who had full follow-up documentation and orthopantomography over five years, and who had no unwell-controlled systemic pathologies that may influence bone metabolism.
Results: Eighty-one patients who received 500 implants met the inclusion criteria. We observed approximately 1 mm of bone resorption at the five-year follow-up, with the first 0.78 mm of them being documented at the three-year follow-up. Adults younger than 60 years old had an increase in bone resorption by approximately 30%. No difference was seen between men and women. However, a slight increase in bone resorption at five years was seen in female patients older than 50 years old than in ones younger than 50 years (by 30%). The narrowest diameter (3.5 mm; p = 0.001) and anterior mandible (p = 0.008) had the highest bone resorptions. Contrarily, with an insertion depth of approximately 1 mm (p = 0.004), the splinted implant prosthesis (p = 0.21) and zirconia material of the prosthesis (p = 0.57) had the lowest bone remodeling. Moreover, patients younger than 60 years and female patients above 50 years had an increased bone resorption.
Conclusions: Bone remodeling is a multifactorial process. The treatment planning has to take into consideration both implant- and patient-specific factors.