Clinical implant dentistry and related research · 2024
Alveolar ridge preservation and its impact on marginal bone level changes around dental implants: A retrospective, cohort comparative study.
СтатьяСравнительное 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.
Cinquini Chiara, Izzetti Rossana, Porreca Annamaria, Iezzi Giovanna, Nisi Marco, Barone Antonio
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: This retrospective study compared the outcomes of implants placed in alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) treated sites with those in spontaneously healed (SH) sites.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included patients presenting with one implant placed in an ARP-treated socket and one in an SH site. The primary outcome was the comparison of Marginal Bone Level Changes (MBLC). Statistical analysis was performed to identify factors influencing MBLC, including age, gender, smoking, parafunctional habits, and prosthetic emergence angle.
RESULTS: Of these, 28 patients (23 females, 82.1%) were included in this analysis. Sockets in the SH group were classified as type I, whereas type II sockets were more common in the ARP group. The SH group exhibited significantly higher MBLC than the ARP group (p = 0.032), with values, respectively, of 1.00 [0.25; 1.62] and 0.40 [0.00; 1.00] mm. Among all evaluated parameters, the performance of ARP was the only factor significantly affecting MBLC (β = -0.72, SE: 0.32, p = 0.026). Age, gender, smoking, parafunctional habits, and prosthetic emergence angle did not significantly affect MBLC.
CONCLUSIONS: The study shows the potential role of ARP in maintaining stable marginal bone levels around implants. In our sample, ARP significantly reduced MBLC compared with spontaneous healing, highlighting its possible impact in clinical practice for better peri-implant bone stability.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included patients presenting with one implant placed in an ARP-treated socket and one in an SH site. The primary outcome was the comparison of Marginal Bone Level Changes (MBLC). Statistical analysis was performed to identify factors influencing MBLC, including age, gender, smoking, parafunctional habits, and prosthetic emergence angle.
RESULTS: Of these, 28 patients (23 females, 82.1%) were included in this analysis. Sockets in the SH group were classified as type I, whereas type II sockets were more common in the ARP group. The SH group exhibited significantly higher MBLC than the ARP group (p = 0.032), with values, respectively, of 1.00 [0.25; 1.62] and 0.40 [0.00; 1.00] mm. Among all evaluated parameters, the performance of ARP was the only factor significantly affecting MBLC (β = -0.72, SE: 0.32, p = 0.026). Age, gender, smoking, parafunctional habits, and prosthetic emergence angle did not significantly affect MBLC.
CONCLUSIONS: The study shows the potential role of ARP in maintaining stable marginal bone levels around implants. In our sample, ARP significantly reduced MBLC compared with spontaneous healing, highlighting its possible impact in clinical practice for better peri-implant bone stability.