Journal of periodontology · 2009
Immediate versus one-stage restoration of small-diameter implants for a single missing maxillary lateral incisor: a 3-year randomized clinical trial.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Degidi Marco, Nardi Diego, Piattelli Adriano
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the bone loss pattern and soft tissue healing of immediately versus one-stage loaded 3.0-mm-diameter implants in cases involving a single missing lateral maxillary incisor.
METHODS: Sixty patients with a missing lateral incisor in the maxilla were randomized to one of the treatments: 30 patients in the immediate-restoration group and 30 patients in the one-stage group. All implants were placed in healed sites and had to be inserted with a torque >25 Ncm. The implants in the immediate-restoration group were fitted with a non-occluding temporary crown on the day of surgery. Both groups received a full occluding final crown 6 months after surgery. Mean marginal bone loss, probing depth, and bleeding on probing were assessed at 6-, 12-, 24-, and 36-month follow-up examinations by a masked examiner.
RESULTS: Sixty 3.0-mm-diameter implants were placed between July 2003 and February 2006; 27 (45.0%) were in men, and 33 (55.0%) were in women. All implants osseointegrated and were clinically stable at the 6-month follow-up. No statistically significant differences were observed for bleeding or plaque index. No implant fractures occurred. At the 36-month follow-up, the accumulated mean marginal bone loss and probing depth were 0.85 +/- 0.71 mm and 1.91 +/- 0.59 mm, respectively, for the immediate-loading group (n = 30) and 0.75 +/- 0.63 mm and 2.27 +/- 0.81 mm, respectively, for the one-stage group (n = 30). There was no statistically significant difference (P >0.05) for the tested outcome measures between the two procedures.
CONCLUSIONS: In the rehabilitation of a single missing lateral maxillary incisor, no statistically significant difference was assessed between immediately and one-stage restored small-diameter implants with regard to implant survival, mean marginal bone loss, and probing depth. Three-millimeter-diameter implants proved to be a predictable treatment option in our test and control groups if a strict clinical protocol was followed.
METHODS: Sixty patients with a missing lateral incisor in the maxilla were randomized to one of the treatments: 30 patients in the immediate-restoration group and 30 patients in the one-stage group. All implants were placed in healed sites and had to be inserted with a torque >25 Ncm. The implants in the immediate-restoration group were fitted with a non-occluding temporary crown on the day of surgery. Both groups received a full occluding final crown 6 months after surgery. Mean marginal bone loss, probing depth, and bleeding on probing were assessed at 6-, 12-, 24-, and 36-month follow-up examinations by a masked examiner.
RESULTS: Sixty 3.0-mm-diameter implants were placed between July 2003 and February 2006; 27 (45.0%) were in men, and 33 (55.0%) were in women. All implants osseointegrated and were clinically stable at the 6-month follow-up. No statistically significant differences were observed for bleeding or plaque index. No implant fractures occurred. At the 36-month follow-up, the accumulated mean marginal bone loss and probing depth were 0.85 +/- 0.71 mm and 1.91 +/- 0.59 mm, respectively, for the immediate-loading group (n = 30) and 0.75 +/- 0.63 mm and 2.27 +/- 0.81 mm, respectively, for the one-stage group (n = 30). There was no statistically significant difference (P >0.05) for the tested outcome measures between the two procedures.
CONCLUSIONS: In the rehabilitation of a single missing lateral maxillary incisor, no statistically significant difference was assessed between immediately and one-stage restored small-diameter implants with regard to implant survival, mean marginal bone loss, and probing depth. Three-millimeter-diameter implants proved to be a predictable treatment option in our test and control groups if a strict clinical protocol was followed.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdolescentAdultAlveolar Bone LossAnodontiaCrownsDental AbutmentsDental Implantation, EndosseousDental Implants, Single-ToothDental Plaque IndexDental Prosthesis DesignDental Prosthesis, Implant-SupportedDental Restoration, TemporaryFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGingival HemorrhageHumansIncisorMaleMaxillaMiddle AgedOsseointegrationPeriodontal IndexPeriodontal PocketTreatment OutcomeWound HealingYoung Adult