{"title":"弓形螺钉通道基台与多单元基台保留单单元种植体修复体在前美学区的生物学、力学和患者报告结果的比较评估:一项体内研究","authors":"Niyati Varshney, Chandan Kumar Kusum, Anshul Trivedi, Mayur Kaushik, Prajesh Dubey, Yashika Bali","doi":"10.4103/jips.jips_101_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>The study aimed to evaluate biological, mechanical, and patient reported parameters associated with ASC abutments and MU abutments for the fabrication of screw retained implant crowns in the anterior esthetic zone.</p><p><strong>Setting and design: </strong>For the study, 20 patients were selected and implants were placed within the constraints of prosthetic envelope. Later, the screw retained crown was fabricated.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Biological parameters (including implant survival rate, marginal bone levels using cone beam computed tomography, and soft tissue assessment using periodontal indices) were measured at the time of crown placement and 1 year follow up. Mechanical parameter (screw loosening) was calculated using removal torque loss (RTL) values obtained at the time of crown placement and 1 year follow up. Patient reported parameters were evaluated using a questionnaire at 1 year follow up.</p><p><strong>Statistical analysis used: </strong>All data were tabulated, statistically analyzed, and compared using SPSS version 23 IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Implant survival was found 100% in both the groups. The marginal bone level reduced considerably in both the groups from baseline to 1 year follow up. The MU abutment group had slightly less marginal bone loss than the ASC abutment group. Additionally, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups' periodontal indices at baseline and 1-year follow-up values. At baseline, the RTL value was substantially lower (P <0.003) in the ASC abutment group than in the MU abutment group, however at the 1-year follow-up, there was no statistically significant difference in RTL or screw loosening between the two groups. Patient-reported data showed no statistically significant difference.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Within the constraints of this study, it was suggested that both ASC and MU abutments provide equally promising results in terms of biological, mechanical, and patient-reported parameters in the anterior esthetic region for single screw-retained crowns.</p>","PeriodicalId":22669,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society","volume":"23 1","pages":"244-252"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10467320/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative evaluation of biological, mechanical, and patient-reported outcomes of angulated screw channel abutments versus multi-unit abutment-retained single-unit implant restorations in the anterior esthetic zone: An-<i>in vivo</i> study.\",\"authors\":\"Niyati Varshney, Chandan Kumar Kusum, Anshul Trivedi, Mayur Kaushik, Prajesh Dubey, Yashika Bali\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jips.jips_101_23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>The study aimed to evaluate biological, mechanical, and patient reported parameters associated with ASC abutments and MU abutments for the fabrication of screw retained implant crowns in the anterior esthetic zone.</p><p><strong>Setting and design: </strong>For the study, 20 patients were selected and implants were placed within the constraints of prosthetic envelope. Later, the screw retained crown was fabricated.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Biological parameters (including implant survival rate, marginal bone levels using cone beam computed tomography, and soft tissue assessment using periodontal indices) were measured at the time of crown placement and 1 year follow up. Mechanical parameter (screw loosening) was calculated using removal torque loss (RTL) values obtained at the time of crown placement and 1 year follow up. Patient reported parameters were evaluated using a questionnaire at 1 year follow up.</p><p><strong>Statistical analysis used: </strong>All data were tabulated, statistically analyzed, and compared using SPSS version 23 IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Implant survival was found 100% in both the groups. The marginal bone level reduced considerably in both the groups from baseline to 1 year follow up. The MU abutment group had slightly less marginal bone loss than the ASC abutment group. Additionally, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups' periodontal indices at baseline and 1-year follow-up values. At baseline, the RTL value was substantially lower (P <0.003) in the ASC abutment group than in the MU abutment group, however at the 1-year follow-up, there was no statistically significant difference in RTL or screw loosening between the two groups. Patient-reported data showed no statistically significant difference.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Within the constraints of this study, it was suggested that both ASC and MU abutments provide equally promising results in terms of biological, mechanical, and patient-reported parameters in the anterior esthetic region for single screw-retained crowns.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22669,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"244-252\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10467320/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_101_23\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_101_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:本研究旨在评估ASC基台和MU基台在前美学区制造螺钉保留种植体冠的生物学、力学和患者报告参数。设置与设计:本研究选择20例患者,种植体放置在假体包膜的约束范围内。随后制作螺钉保留冠。材料和方法:在冠放置时和1年随访时测量生物学参数(包括种植体存活率、锥形束计算机断层扫描的边缘骨水平和牙周指数的软组织评估)。机械参数(螺钉松动)是根据冠放置时获得的移除扭矩损失(RTL)值和1年随访来计算的。患者报告的参数在1年随访时使用问卷进行评估。所用统计分析:所有数据均采用SPSS version 23 IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA进行制表、统计分析和比较。结果:两组种植体成活率均为100%。从基线到1年随访,两组的边缘骨水平均显著下降。MU基牙组边缘骨丢失略低于ASC基牙组。此外,两组的牙周指数在基线和1年随访值之间无统计学差异。在基线时,ASC基牙组的RTL值明显低于MU基牙组(P <0.003),但在1年的随访中,两组的RTL和螺钉松动无统计学差异。患者报告的数据没有统计学上的显著差异。结论:在本研究的限制下,ASC基台和MU基台在单螺钉保留冠的前美学区域的生物学、力学和患者报告的参数方面提供了同样有希望的结果。
Comparative evaluation of biological, mechanical, and patient-reported outcomes of angulated screw channel abutments versus multi-unit abutment-retained single-unit implant restorations in the anterior esthetic zone: An-in vivo study.
Aims: The study aimed to evaluate biological, mechanical, and patient reported parameters associated with ASC abutments and MU abutments for the fabrication of screw retained implant crowns in the anterior esthetic zone.
Setting and design: For the study, 20 patients were selected and implants were placed within the constraints of prosthetic envelope. Later, the screw retained crown was fabricated.
Materials and methods: Biological parameters (including implant survival rate, marginal bone levels using cone beam computed tomography, and soft tissue assessment using periodontal indices) were measured at the time of crown placement and 1 year follow up. Mechanical parameter (screw loosening) was calculated using removal torque loss (RTL) values obtained at the time of crown placement and 1 year follow up. Patient reported parameters were evaluated using a questionnaire at 1 year follow up.
Statistical analysis used: All data were tabulated, statistically analyzed, and compared using SPSS version 23 IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA.
Results: Implant survival was found 100% in both the groups. The marginal bone level reduced considerably in both the groups from baseline to 1 year follow up. The MU abutment group had slightly less marginal bone loss than the ASC abutment group. Additionally, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups' periodontal indices at baseline and 1-year follow-up values. At baseline, the RTL value was substantially lower (P <0.003) in the ASC abutment group than in the MU abutment group, however at the 1-year follow-up, there was no statistically significant difference in RTL or screw loosening between the two groups. Patient-reported data showed no statistically significant difference.
Conclusion: Within the constraints of this study, it was suggested that both ASC and MU abutments provide equally promising results in terms of biological, mechanical, and patient-reported parameters in the anterior esthetic region for single screw-retained crowns.