Abstract

Objectives:The aim of our study was to compare peri-implant bone loss at implants placed in alveolar sockets filled with a particulate allogenous bone graft (DFDBA 300-500 µm) and platelet concentrates versus at implants placed in the native bone.Materials and Methods:A retrospective clinical study was performed. A total of 84 patients were included with 247 implants for the restoration of mono and pluri-radicular teeth: 169 implants in native bone and 78 in socket-grafted bone. The peri-implant bone loss was measured by 2 independent operators at 6 and 12 months.Results:The overall mesial and distal peri-implant bone losses were 0.9 ± 0.7 mm and 0.9 ± 0.8 mm at 6 months, respectively, and 1 ± 0.65 mm and 1.2 ± 0.9 mm at 12 months, respectively. In the tested group, the bone loss was 0.8 ± 0.8 mm at 6 months and 1.2 ± 0.9 mm at 12 months. In the control group, the bone loss was 1.0 ± 0.7 mm at 6 months and 0.95 ± 0.6 mm at 12 months. There were no statistically significant differences in bone loss between the two groups. Taking both groups together, there were no statistically significant difference in bone loss between patients with or without histories of periodontitis, but there was a statistically significant difference in bone loss between the mandible and maxilla as well as between unitary and total edentations and between partially and total edentulous patients.Conclusion:At 6 and 12 months, the peri-implant bone loss in sockets preserved with DFDBA and platelet concentrates was similar to the peri-implant bone loss in native bone.

Highlights

  • Dental implants are regularly included in the overall treatment plan for patients

  • The aim of our study was to compare peri-implant bone loss at implants placed in alveolar sockets filled with a particulate allogenous bone graft (DFDBA 300-500 μm) and platelet concentrates versus at implants placed in the native bone

  • At 6 and 12 months, the peri-implant bone loss in sockets preserved with Demineralized Freeze-Dried Bone Allograft (DFDBA) and platelet concentrates was similar to the periimplant bone loss in native bone

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Dental implants are regularly included in the overall treatment plan for patients. 530 The Open Dentistry Journal, 2018, Volume 12 setting function and 0.2 mm per year thereafter, the implant had not to be responsible for persistent and/or irreversible signs and symptoms, such as pain, infection, nerve damage, paresthesia or penetration into the mandibular canal, and it was necessary that the minimum success rate of implants was 85% at the end of a period of 5 years and 80% at the end of a period of 10 years [1]. They stated that bone loss should be less than 1.5 to 1.6 mm at the end of the first year of function and 0.2 mm per year thereafter

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call