A randomized controlled trial for evaluation of bone density changes around immediate functionally and nonfunctionally loaded implants using three-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography.

AIM: The aim of this study was to compare and assess bone density changes around immediate functionally and nonfunctionally loaded implants.

SETTINGS AND

DESIGN

In vivo comparative study.

MATERIALS AND

METHODS

Sixty participants selected based on the predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria received single tooth implants in mandible under two implant loading protocols: Immediate functionally loaded (IFL) and immediate nonfunctionally loaded (INFL). Randomization was done by computer-aided simple randomization procedure. Self-tapering, aggressive SLA implants were placed in the single tooth edentulous sites of mandible in both the groups. Three-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography (3D CBCT) was taken at baseline, 3 and 6 months postimplant placement. Quantitative analysis of the bone density was performed using 3D CBCT in three areas around the implants at crestal, middle, and apical regions of implants.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Quantitative data were summarized as mean ± standard deviation. Statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS software version 21.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) by unpaired t-test.

RESULTS

Bone density changes after implant placement in IFL group from baseline to 3 months were; crestal region (314.18 ± 71.69), middle (278.23 ± 70.17), apical (274.70 ± 59.79) and changes from 3 to 6 months were; crestal (-105.55 ± 39.60), middle (-114.80 ± 41.46), apical (-141.88 ± 69.58). Bone density changes after implant placement in INFL group from baseline to 3 months were crestal region (199.42 ± 47.97), middle (56.91 ± 10.39), apical (200.98 ± 67.43) and changes from 3 to 6 months were; crestal (-194.38 ± 75.30), middle (-204.40 ± 63.75), apical (-191.28 ± 62.33).

CONCLUSIONS

It was concluded that INFL implant group showed better bone density when compared to IFL implant group.