两种种植体-基台连接类型对峰骨稳定性的影响:一项为期 3 年的分口临床试验比较。

Behnam Shakibaie, Paolo Nava, Javier Calatrava, Markus B Blatz, Katalin Nagy, Hamoun Sabri
{"title":"两种种植体-基台连接类型对峰骨稳定性的影响:一项为期 3 年的分口临床试验比较。","authors":"Behnam Shakibaie, Paolo Nava, Javier Calatrava, Markus B Blatz, Katalin Nagy, Hamoun Sabri","doi":"10.11607/prd.7277","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This prospective, preliminary controlled clinical trial investigates the comparative effectiveness of platform-switching (PS) versus traditional butt-joint or platform-matching (PM) implant-abutment connections on peri-implant crestal bone stability. Utilizing a split mouth design, 10 systemically healthy patients (n= 20 implants) had adjacent non-restorable maxillary anterior teeth replaced with two different implants (butt-joint connections and platform-switching interfaces). Patients underwent alveolar ridge preservation, followed by implant placement: platform-matching implants were inserted at crestal bone level, and platform-switching implants were placed 1mm subcrestally. Customized Zirconia crowns were then fabricated for both systems. Outcome measures included bleeding on probing (BOP), probing pocket depth (PPD), and marginal bone loss (MBL), which were evaluated through standardized periapical radiographs over 3-year timeframe. Results showed significantly higher initial MBL in the PM group (0.86 ± 0.13 mm) compared to the PS group (0.34±0.29 mm) [p value: p<0.01]. Moreover, at the three-year follow-up, the crestal bone levels remained above the implant shoulder until the third year of the study for the PS subcrestal group (PS: -0.15±0.39 mm) and slightly below the implant platform in the PM crestal group (PM: 0.55±0.19). After 3 years, the PS group also exhibited lower mean BOP percentages (12%) than the butt-joint group (17%). This study suggests that subcrestal placement with PS and internal connections can provide better long-term peri- implant bone preservation, thereby potentially improving implant success and aesthetic outcomes in the anterior maxillary region.</p>","PeriodicalId":94231,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of Two Implant-Abutment Connection Types on Crestal Bone Stability: A 3-Year Comparative Split-Mouth Clinical Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Behnam Shakibaie, Paolo Nava, Javier Calatrava, Markus B Blatz, Katalin Nagy, Hamoun Sabri\",\"doi\":\"10.11607/prd.7277\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This prospective, preliminary controlled clinical trial investigates the comparative effectiveness of platform-switching (PS) versus traditional butt-joint or platform-matching (PM) implant-abutment connections on peri-implant crestal bone stability. Utilizing a split mouth design, 10 systemically healthy patients (n= 20 implants) had adjacent non-restorable maxillary anterior teeth replaced with two different implants (butt-joint connections and platform-switching interfaces). Patients underwent alveolar ridge preservation, followed by implant placement: platform-matching implants were inserted at crestal bone level, and platform-switching implants were placed 1mm subcrestally. Customized Zirconia crowns were then fabricated for both systems. Outcome measures included bleeding on probing (BOP), probing pocket depth (PPD), and marginal bone loss (MBL), which were evaluated through standardized periapical radiographs over 3-year timeframe. Results showed significantly higher initial MBL in the PM group (0.86 ± 0.13 mm) compared to the PS group (0.34±0.29 mm) [p value: p<0.01]. Moreover, at the three-year follow-up, the crestal bone levels remained above the implant shoulder until the third year of the study for the PS subcrestal group (PS: -0.15±0.39 mm) and slightly below the implant platform in the PM crestal group (PM: 0.55±0.19). After 3 years, the PS group also exhibited lower mean BOP percentages (12%) than the butt-joint group (17%). This study suggests that subcrestal placement with PS and internal connections can provide better long-term peri- implant bone preservation, thereby potentially improving implant success and aesthetic outcomes in the anterior maxillary region.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94231,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.11607/prd.7277\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/prd.7277","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这项前瞻性、初步对照临床试验研究了平台切换(PS)与传统对接或平台匹配(PM)种植体基台连接对种植体周围骨嵴稳定性的比较效果。通过分口设计,10 名全身健康的患者(n= 20 个种植体)用两种不同的种植体(对接连接和平台切换界面)替换了相邻的非修复性上颌前牙。患者先进行牙槽嵴保留,然后植入种植体:平台匹配种植体植入嵴骨水平,平台切换种植体植入嵴下 1 毫米。然后为两种系统制作定制的氧化锆牙冠。结果指标包括探诊出血量(BOP)、探诊袋深度(PPD)和边缘骨质流失量(MBL),这些指标通过标准化的根尖周X光片进行评估,为期3年。结果显示,PM 组的初始 MBL(0.86±0.13 毫米)明显高于 PS 组(0.34±0.29 毫米)[P 值:P] 。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Impact of Two Implant-Abutment Connection Types on Crestal Bone Stability: A 3-Year Comparative Split-Mouth Clinical Trial.

This prospective, preliminary controlled clinical trial investigates the comparative effectiveness of platform-switching (PS) versus traditional butt-joint or platform-matching (PM) implant-abutment connections on peri-implant crestal bone stability. Utilizing a split mouth design, 10 systemically healthy patients (n= 20 implants) had adjacent non-restorable maxillary anterior teeth replaced with two different implants (butt-joint connections and platform-switching interfaces). Patients underwent alveolar ridge preservation, followed by implant placement: platform-matching implants were inserted at crestal bone level, and platform-switching implants were placed 1mm subcrestally. Customized Zirconia crowns were then fabricated for both systems. Outcome measures included bleeding on probing (BOP), probing pocket depth (PPD), and marginal bone loss (MBL), which were evaluated through standardized periapical radiographs over 3-year timeframe. Results showed significantly higher initial MBL in the PM group (0.86 ± 0.13 mm) compared to the PS group (0.34±0.29 mm) [p value: p<0.01]. Moreover, at the three-year follow-up, the crestal bone levels remained above the implant shoulder until the third year of the study for the PS subcrestal group (PS: -0.15±0.39 mm) and slightly below the implant platform in the PM crestal group (PM: 0.55±0.19). After 3 years, the PS group also exhibited lower mean BOP percentages (12%) than the butt-joint group (17%). This study suggests that subcrestal placement with PS and internal connections can provide better long-term peri- implant bone preservation, thereby potentially improving implant success and aesthetic outcomes in the anterior maxillary region.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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