Dercelino Bittencourt Junior, Erton Masssamitsu Miyasawa, Valdir Gouveia Garcia, Rafael Scaf de Molon, Flávia Noemy Gasparini Kiatake Fontão
{"title":"Influence of Axial and Angled Implants on Marginal Bone Loss in All-on-Four Implant-Supported Rehabilitation: A Retrospective Cohort Study.","authors":"Dercelino Bittencourt Junior, Erton Masssamitsu Miyasawa, Valdir Gouveia Garcia, Rafael Scaf de Molon, Flávia Noemy Gasparini Kiatake Fontão","doi":"10.1007/s12663-025-02508-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this study was to compare marginal bone loss levels between axially and angled installed implants in maxillary rehabilitation utilizing the All-on-Four concept, while also examining the impact of terminal cantilever size on implant/prosthesis set survival.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study involved 11 patients (44 implants) who received implant-supported prostheses with immediate loading. Radiographic evaluations were conducted on the day of prosthesis delivery, including panoramic and periapical radiographs, establishing the baseline (T0). Follow-up periapical radiographs were taken at 6 months (T1), 1 year (T2), and 2 years (T3) post-prosthesis delivery. Panoramic radiographs were used to determine implant angulation and the size of terminal cantilevers. Marginal bone loss on the mesial and distal aspects of each implant was assessed across study periods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Statistical analysis revealed no significant difference in marginal bone loss between axially and inclined implants. Terminal cantilever lengths ranged from 6.11 to 17.15 mm, with a decrease observed in cases with implants tilted up to 30°. However, no significant difference in cantilever lengths was found between the two groups (group 1: tilts 0°-30°, group 2: tilts above 30°). The survival rate of the implant/prosthesis sets was 100%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In conclusion, there were no statistically significant differences in marginal bone loss between axial and inclined implants. Implant inclination allowed for prostheses with smaller terminal cantilevers, contributing to a balanced distribution of stresses on the implant/prosthesis set. Further randomized clinical trial should be conducted to confirm the presented findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":47495,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Maxillofacial & Oral Surgery","volume":"24 4","pages":"978-988"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12316617/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Maxillofacial & Oral Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-025-02508-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare marginal bone loss levels between axially and angled installed implants in maxillary rehabilitation utilizing the All-on-Four concept, while also examining the impact of terminal cantilever size on implant/prosthesis set survival.
Materials and methods: This retrospective cohort study involved 11 patients (44 implants) who received implant-supported prostheses with immediate loading. Radiographic evaluations were conducted on the day of prosthesis delivery, including panoramic and periapical radiographs, establishing the baseline (T0). Follow-up periapical radiographs were taken at 6 months (T1), 1 year (T2), and 2 years (T3) post-prosthesis delivery. Panoramic radiographs were used to determine implant angulation and the size of terminal cantilevers. Marginal bone loss on the mesial and distal aspects of each implant was assessed across study periods.
Results: Statistical analysis revealed no significant difference in marginal bone loss between axially and inclined implants. Terminal cantilever lengths ranged from 6.11 to 17.15 mm, with a decrease observed in cases with implants tilted up to 30°. However, no significant difference in cantilever lengths was found between the two groups (group 1: tilts 0°-30°, group 2: tilts above 30°). The survival rate of the implant/prosthesis sets was 100%.
Conclusion: In conclusion, there were no statistically significant differences in marginal bone loss between axial and inclined implants. Implant inclination allowed for prostheses with smaller terminal cantilevers, contributing to a balanced distribution of stresses on the implant/prosthesis set. Further randomized clinical trial should be conducted to confirm the presented findings.
期刊介绍：
This journal offers comprehensive coverage of new techniques, important developments and innovative ideas in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. Practice-applicable articles help develop the methods used to handle dentoalveolar surgery, facial injuries and deformities, TMJ disorders, oral cancer, jaw reconstruction, anesthesia and analgesia. The journal also includes specifics on new instruments, diagnostic equipment’s and modern therapeutic drugs and devices. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery is recommended for first or priority subscription by the Dental Section of the Medical Library Association. Specific topics covered recently have included: ? distraction osteogenesis ? synthetic bone substitutes ? fibroblast growth factors ? fetal wound healing ? skull base surgery ? computer-assisted surgery ? vascularized bone grafts Benefits to authorsWe also provide many author benefits, such as free PDFs, a liberal copyright policy, special discounts on Elsevier publications and much more. Please click here for more information on our author services.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
