Journal of stomatology, oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2023
Three-dimensional radiographic assessment of immediate implant placement in the posterior mandible: A novel parameter-based classification.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Khoury Nicolas, Husseini Bachar, Tahchy Daniel, Saadeh Carmen, Ghosn Nabil, Younes Ronald
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To assess the implant position (IP), the interradicular septum width (ISW) and radiographic bone to implant contact (BIC), when simulating an immediate implant placement in first and second mandibular molars.
STUDY DESIGN: 75 patients (150 sites) were studied using cone beam computed tomography scans (CBCT) and computer aided design software. Implants were placed in a prosthetically driven position; subsequently, IP and BIC were digitally calculated. Linear ISW was also analyzed at 2, 4 and 6mm apically to the highest septal bony peak. Multiple linear regressions were performed to assess relationships between BIC and the different predictive variables. Additionally, the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve was used to create a model for BIC based on the ISW at 2mm.
RESULTS: BIC in implants replacing first molars was the highest at the septal (S) position when compared to those in septal-mesial (S-M) position (p-value 0.001). As for the second molar, the highest percentage of BIC was recorded at the septal (S) position, followed by those in S-M and mesial (M) positions (p<0.001).
CONCLUSION: According to the proposed classification, clinician must consider the ISW and IP when placing immediate implant in the first and second mandibular molar sites. When tackling first molars, S position is predominant, while S-M position is the most common in the second molars. ISW at 2mm should be at least respectively 2mm and 2.5mm at the first and second molar sites to achieve 50% of BIC.
STUDY DESIGN: 75 patients (150 sites) were studied using cone beam computed tomography scans (CBCT) and computer aided design software. Implants were placed in a prosthetically driven position; subsequently, IP and BIC were digitally calculated. Linear ISW was also analyzed at 2, 4 and 6mm apically to the highest septal bony peak. Multiple linear regressions were performed to assess relationships between BIC and the different predictive variables. Additionally, the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve was used to create a model for BIC based on the ISW at 2mm.
RESULTS: BIC in implants replacing first molars was the highest at the septal (S) position when compared to those in septal-mesial (S-M) position (p-value 0.001). As for the second molar, the highest percentage of BIC was recorded at the septal (S) position, followed by those in S-M and mesial (M) positions (p<0.001).
CONCLUSION: According to the proposed classification, clinician must consider the ISW and IP when placing immediate implant in the first and second mandibular molar sites. When tackling first molars, S position is predominant, while S-M position is the most common in the second molars. ISW at 2mm should be at least respectively 2mm and 2.5mm at the first and second molar sites to achieve 50% of BIC.