后牙种植体支撑固定修复体的出现角度及其对种植体周围骨丢失的影响:回顾性临床研究。

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Chi-Ching Chang, Jennifer Chang, Anthony Osborne, Ali Mahmood Shaki Al Hatem, Edward Chaoho Chien, Daniel Wismeijer, Chun-Teh Lee
{"title":"后牙种植体支撑固定修复体的出现角度及其对种植体周围骨丢失的影响:回顾性临床研究。","authors":"Chi-Ching Chang, Jennifer Chang, Anthony Osborne, Ali Mahmood Shaki Al Hatem, Edward Chaoho Chien, Daniel Wismeijer, Chun-Teh Lee","doi":"10.1016/j.prosdent.2025.09.011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Statement of problem: </strong>Clinicians aim to restore dental implants with contours that replicate the natural crown. However, evidence directly comparing the emergence angles of posterior implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) with those of natural crowns is lacking, and the influence of FDP emergence angles on peri-implant bone loss remains inconclusive.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this retrospective clinical study was to compare the emergence angles of posterior implant-supported FDPs with those of natural crowns and to evaluate the effect of prosthesis contours on peri-implant bone stability.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Clinical records and periapical radiographs of patients with posterior single implants and with at least a 6-month follow-up after definitive restorations were evaluated. Edentulous space width (ESW), implant placement depth (IPD), mesial and distal emergence angles (EAs) of the natural teeth (EA<sub>Tooth</sub>), implant abutments (EA<sub>Ab</sub>), and implant-supported crowns (EA<sub>Res</sub>, EA<sub>ResAb</sub>) were measured. Pearson correlation analysis was performed to evaluate the correlations between the implant emergence angles and the ratio of the edentulous space to implant diameter (ESW/∅). The suggested implant placement depth was proposed for different implant diameters based on ideal emergence angles. Univariate binary logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate the effects of prosthesis contour and other variables on marginal bone stability (α=.050).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-nine implants of 75 participants were included. Overall, the EAs of implant-supported crowns (EA<sub>Res</sub>, EA<sub>ResAb</sub>) were significantly greater than those of EA<sub>Tooth</sub> (P<.05). The EA<sub>Res</sub> and EA<sub>ResAb</sub> were positively correlated with ESW/∅ (P<.05), and EA<sub>Res</sub> was negatively correlated with IPD (P<.05). The suggested implant placement depths at molars were generally greater than at premolars. The emergence angles were not significantly associated with peri-implant marginal bone stability (P>.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The emergence angles of posterior implant-supported FDPs were greater than those of the natural tooth. The difference was more pronounced in molar sites than in premolar sites. However, the contour of an implant-supported FDP was not associated with peri-implant bone level change.</p>","PeriodicalId":16866,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Emergence angles of posterior implant-supported fixed dental prostheses and their effect on peri-implant bone loss: A retrospective clinical study.\",\"authors\":\"Chi-Ching Chang, Jennifer Chang, Anthony Osborne, Ali Mahmood Shaki Al Hatem, Edward Chaoho Chien, Daniel Wismeijer, Chun-Teh Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.prosdent.2025.09.011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Statement of problem: </strong>Clinicians aim to restore dental implants with contours that replicate the natural crown. However, evidence directly comparing the emergence angles of posterior implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) with those of natural crowns is lacking, and the influence of FDP emergence angles on peri-implant bone loss remains inconclusive.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this retrospective clinical study was to compare the emergence angles of posterior implant-supported FDPs with those of natural crowns and to evaluate the effect of prosthesis contours on peri-implant bone stability.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Clinical records and periapical radiographs of patients with posterior single implants and with at least a 6-month follow-up after definitive restorations were evaluated. Edentulous space width (ESW), implant placement depth (IPD), mesial and distal emergence angles (EAs) of the natural teeth (EA<sub>Tooth</sub>), implant abutments (EA<sub>Ab</sub>), and implant-supported crowns (EA<sub>Res</sub>, EA<sub>ResAb</sub>) were measured. Pearson correlation analysis was performed to evaluate the correlations between the implant emergence angles and the ratio of the edentulous space to implant diameter (ESW/∅). The suggested implant placement depth was proposed for different implant diameters based on ideal emergence angles. Univariate binary logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate the effects of prosthesis contour and other variables on marginal bone stability (α=.050).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-nine implants of 75 participants were included. Overall, the EAs of implant-supported crowns (EA<sub>Res</sub>, EA<sub>ResAb</sub>) were significantly greater than those of EA<sub>Tooth</sub> (P<.05). The EA<sub>Res</sub> and EA<sub>ResAb</sub> were positively correlated with ESW/∅ (P<.05), and EA<sub>Res</sub> was negatively correlated with IPD (P<.05). The suggested implant placement depths at molars were generally greater than at premolars. The emergence angles were not significantly associated with peri-implant marginal bone stability (P>.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The emergence angles of posterior implant-supported FDPs were greater than those of the natural tooth. The difference was more pronounced in molar sites than in premolar sites. However, the contour of an implant-supported FDP was not associated with peri-implant bone level change.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16866,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2025.09.011\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2025.09.011","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

问题陈述:临床医生的目标是修复牙种植体的轮廓,复制自然冠。然而,缺乏直接比较后牙种植体支持的固定牙修复体(FDP)与天然牙冠的出牙角度的证据,并且FDP出牙角度对种植体周围骨丢失的影响尚无定论。目的:本回顾性临床研究的目的是比较后路种植体支持的FDPs与天然冠的出现角度,并评估假体轮廓对种植体周围骨稳定性的影响。材料和方法:对采用后路单种植体的患者的临床记录和根尖周x线片进行评估,并在确定修复后进行至少6个月的随访。测量天然牙(EATooth)、种植基牙(EAAb)、种植冠(EARes、EAResAb)的无牙间隙宽度(ESW)、种植体放置深度(IPD)、近端和远端出牙角(EAs)。采用Pearson相关分析评价种植体出牙角度与无牙间距/种植体直径之比(ESW/∅)的相关性。根据理想出牙角度,提出不同种植体直径的种植深度建议。采用单因素二元logistic回归分析评估假体轮廓和其他变量对边缘骨稳定性的影响(α= 0.050)。结果:共纳入75名受试者89颗种植体。总体而言,种植冠(EARes、EAResAb)的ea明显大于eooth (PRes、EAResAb与ESW/∅呈正相关(PRes与IPD负相关,p < 0.05)。结论:后牙种植体支持的FDPs的出牙角度大于天然牙。磨牙部位的差异比前磨牙部位更明显。然而,种植体支持的FDP轮廓与种植体周围骨水平变化无关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Emergence angles of posterior implant-supported fixed dental prostheses and their effect on peri-implant bone loss: A retrospective clinical study.

Statement of problem: Clinicians aim to restore dental implants with contours that replicate the natural crown. However, evidence directly comparing the emergence angles of posterior implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) with those of natural crowns is lacking, and the influence of FDP emergence angles on peri-implant bone loss remains inconclusive.

Purpose: The purpose of this retrospective clinical study was to compare the emergence angles of posterior implant-supported FDPs with those of natural crowns and to evaluate the effect of prosthesis contours on peri-implant bone stability.

Material and methods: Clinical records and periapical radiographs of patients with posterior single implants and with at least a 6-month follow-up after definitive restorations were evaluated. Edentulous space width (ESW), implant placement depth (IPD), mesial and distal emergence angles (EAs) of the natural teeth (EATooth), implant abutments (EAAb), and implant-supported crowns (EARes, EAResAb) were measured. Pearson correlation analysis was performed to evaluate the correlations between the implant emergence angles and the ratio of the edentulous space to implant diameter (ESW/∅). The suggested implant placement depth was proposed for different implant diameters based on ideal emergence angles. Univariate binary logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate the effects of prosthesis contour and other variables on marginal bone stability (α=.050).

Results: Eighty-nine implants of 75 participants were included. Overall, the EAs of implant-supported crowns (EARes, EAResAb) were significantly greater than those of EATooth (P<.05). The EARes and EAResAb were positively correlated with ESW/∅ (P<.05), and EARes was negatively correlated with IPD (P<.05). The suggested implant placement depths at molars were generally greater than at premolars. The emergence angles were not significantly associated with peri-implant marginal bone stability (P>.05).

Conclusions: The emergence angles of posterior implant-supported FDPs were greater than those of the natural tooth. The difference was more pronounced in molar sites than in premolar sites. However, the contour of an implant-supported FDP was not associated with peri-implant bone level change.

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
Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
13.00%
发文量
599
审稿时长
69 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry is the leading professional journal devoted exclusively to prosthetic and restorative dentistry. The Journal is the official publication for 24 leading U.S. international prosthodontic organizations. The monthly publication features timely, original peer-reviewed articles on the newest techniques, dental materials, and research findings. The Journal serves prosthodontists and dentists in advanced practice, and features color photos that illustrate many step-by-step procedures. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry is included in Index Medicus and CINAHL.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信