Clinical oral implants research · 2015
Marginal bone-level alterations of loaded zirconia and titanium dental implants: an experimental study in the dog mandible.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Thoma Daniel S, Benic Goran I, Muñoz Fernando, Kohal Ralf, Sanz Martin Ignacio, Cantalapiedra Antonio G, Hämmerle Christoph H F, Jung Ronald E
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The aim was to test whether or not the marginal bone-level alterations of loaded zirconia implants are similar to the bone-level alterations of a grade 4 titanium one-piece dental implant.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In six dogs, all premolars and the first molars were extracted in the mandible. Four months later, three zirconia implants (BPI, VC, ZD) and a control titanium one-piece (STM) implant were randomly placed in each hemimandible and left for transmucosal healing (baseline). Six months later, CAD/CAM crowns were cemented. Sacrifice was scheduled at 6-month postloading. Digital X-rays were taken at implant placement, crowns insertion, and sacrifice. Marginal bone-level alterations were calculated, and intra- and intergroup comparisons performed adjusted by confounding factors.
RESULTS: Implants were successfully placed. Until crown insertion, two implants were fractured (one VC, one ZD). At sacrifice, 5 more implants were (partly) fractured (one BPI, four ZD), and one lost osseointegration (VC). No decementation of crowns occurred. All implant systems demonstrated a statistically significant (except VC) loss of marginal bone between baseline and crown insertion ranging from 0.29 mm (VC; P = 0.116) to 0.80 mm (ZD; P = 0.013). The estimated marginal bone loss between baseline and 6 months of loading ranged between 0.19 mm (BPI) and 1.11 mm (VC), being statistically significant for STM and VC only (P < 0.05). The changes in marginal bone levels were statistically significantly different between zirconia implants and control implants (STM vs. BPI P = 0.007; vs. VC P = 0.001; vs. ZD P = 0.011).
CONCLUSIONS: Zirconia implants were more prone to fracture prior to and after loading with implant-supported crowns compared to titanium implants. Individual differences and variability in the extent of the bone-level changes during the 12-month study period were found between the different implant types and materials.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In six dogs, all premolars and the first molars were extracted in the mandible. Four months later, three zirconia implants (BPI, VC, ZD) and a control titanium one-piece (STM) implant were randomly placed in each hemimandible and left for transmucosal healing (baseline). Six months later, CAD/CAM crowns were cemented. Sacrifice was scheduled at 6-month postloading. Digital X-rays were taken at implant placement, crowns insertion, and sacrifice. Marginal bone-level alterations were calculated, and intra- and intergroup comparisons performed adjusted by confounding factors.
RESULTS: Implants were successfully placed. Until crown insertion, two implants were fractured (one VC, one ZD). At sacrifice, 5 more implants were (partly) fractured (one BPI, four ZD), and one lost osseointegration (VC). No decementation of crowns occurred. All implant systems demonstrated a statistically significant (except VC) loss of marginal bone between baseline and crown insertion ranging from 0.29 mm (VC; P = 0.116) to 0.80 mm (ZD; P = 0.013). The estimated marginal bone loss between baseline and 6 months of loading ranged between 0.19 mm (BPI) and 1.11 mm (VC), being statistically significant for STM and VC only (P < 0.05). The changes in marginal bone levels were statistically significantly different between zirconia implants and control implants (STM vs. BPI P = 0.007; vs. VC P = 0.001; vs. ZD P = 0.011).
CONCLUSIONS: Zirconia implants were more prone to fracture prior to and after loading with implant-supported crowns compared to titanium implants. Individual differences and variability in the extent of the bone-level changes during the 12-month study period were found between the different implant types and materials.