Difference In Marginal Bone Loss Research Articles

Comparison of the success rate and marginal bone loss of implants placed simultaneously with either bone expansion or ridge splitting in maxillary sites: a prospective non-randomized study

This study was performed to compare the amount of marginal bone loss (MBL) and the success rate of implants placed following maxillary ridge expansion with two surgical techniques. A non-randomized prospective study was designed. The patients underwent either bone expansion or ridge splitting, and simultaneous implant placement. The implants were loaded according to the delayed loading protocol with single crowns. Each study group included 35 implants placed in 31 patients. One year after loading, the implant success rate was 100 % in both groups. The median MBL was 1.00 mm in both groups (interquartile range 0.10 mm in the bone expansion group and 0.30 mm in the ridge splitting group) (no significant difference, P = 0.749). The median MBL around implants placed in sites with D2, D3, and D4 density bone was 1.40 mm, 1.00 mm, and 0.80 mm in the expansion group and 1.50 mm, 1.00 mm, and 0.85 mm in the splitting group, respectively. There was a significant difference in MBL between the different bone density types within both groups (P < 0.001). In conclusion, no significant difference in the amount of MBL or the success rate was observed between implants placed simultaneously with ridge splitting and those placed simultaneously with bone expansion, in the maxilla.

Marginal bone loss in ball versus locator attachments in implantretained overdentures: systematic review and meta-analysis.

This systematic review compares the impact of ball and locator attachments on marginal bone loss in implant-retained overdentures in completely edentulous patients. Following PRISMA guidelines, health science librarians completed literature searches from inception to March 17, 2023 in seven databases. There were 15,686 items exported to EndNote from Embase.com, CINAHL (EBSCO), Cochrane Library, Ovid MEDLINE-ALL, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Hand-searching added four more articles. After deduplication, 6756 items were screened for eligibility. Twenty-nine studies were assessed by full text, of which ten studies, involving 424 subjects, were included in the review. Risk of bias assessment was conducted using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. A meta-analysis was performed to synthesize and analyze the collective data from the selected studies. The included studies used diverse methodologies, implant systems, and loading protocols. Most studies reported no significant difference in marginal bone loss between ball and locator attachments. The meta-analysis revealed high heterogeneity. The results of this systematic review suggest that ball and locator attachments exhibit similar performance in terms of marginal bone loss in implant-retained overdentures. However, the limited number, risk of bias, and heterogeneity of studies highlight the need for standardized research designs and larger sample sizes in future investigations to draw more definitive conclusions.

Clinical assessment of maxillary screw-retained implant prosthesis fabricated from digital versus conventional full- arch implant impression. A randomized controlled clinical trial.

To evaluate the peri-implant marginal bone loss (MBL) and prosthodontic complications of maxillary screw-retained implant prosthesis fabricated from digital versus conventional full- arch implant impression. 28 participants with edentulous maxillary arches were randomly selected and enrolled in two equal groups; Group I conventional impression group (CIG) and Group II Digital impression group (DIG). All patients were rehabilitated with maxillary screwretained implant prosthesis retained by 6 implants. Peri-implant MBL and prosthodontic complications and were registered at 6, 12, and 24 months (m). Data was collected and statistically analyzed. Regarding the effect of time, there was a statistically significant increase in MBL at 6, 12 and 24 m follow-up periods (P<.001). As for the effect of groups, there was no statistically significant difference in MBL between CIG and DIG at 6, 12 and 24 m where P value was 0.083, 0.087 and 0.133 respectively. Prosthetic complications were recorded 19 times in the conventional group and 12 times in the digital group with no significant difference between both groups (P=.303). Digital full -arch implant impression is a reliable impression technique and may represent an alternative to conventional impression technique in the fabrication of maxillary screw-retained implant prosthesis.

Conometric Connection for Implant-Supported Crowns: A Prospective Clinical Cohort Study.

Traditional screw or cemented connections in dental implants present limitations, prompting the exploration of alternative methods. This study assesses the clinical outcomes of single crowns and fixed partial prostheses supported by conometric connections after one year of follow-up. Twenty-two patients received 70 implants, supporting 33 rehabilitations. Biological responses and prosthodontic complications were evaluated at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. All implants exhibited successful osseointegration, with no losses or peri-implant inflammation. Marginal bone levels showed minimal changes, well below pathological thresholds. The difference in marginal bone loss (MBL) was -0.27 ± 0.79 mm between T0 and T1, and -0.51 ± 0.93 mm between T0 and T2. No abutment screw loosening or crown chipping occurred. However, coupling stability loss was observed in nine cases. The conometric connection demonstrated successful integration and minimal complications after one year. This alternative shows promise, particularly in simplifying handling and improving marginal adaptation. Further research with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up is warranted for comprehensive validation.

Difference in marginal bone loss around implants between short implant-supported partial fixed prostheses with and without cantilever: a retrospective clinical study

PurposeTo investigate the influence of cantilever prosthetic arm on the marginal bone loss (MBL) over time around dental implants supporting short fixed partial dentures (FPDs), in a record-based retrospective study.MethodsAll cases of 3-unit implant-supported FPDs, supported by 2–3 implants, from the database of cases treated at one specialist clinic were considered for inclusion. Only implants with a minimum of 36 months of radiological follow-up were considered. Univariate linear regression models were used to compare MBL over time between 12 clinical covariates, after which a linear mixed-effects model was built.ResultsOne-hundred-thirty-nine patients (64 men, 75 women) with 164 3-unit implant-supported FPDs (333 implants supporting non-cantilevered FPDs, 94 supporting cantilevered FPDs) were included in the study. The patients were followed up clinically and radiographically for a mean of 154.1 ± 78.0 (min–max, 37.3–364.6) and 132.9 ± 77.3 months (min–max, 36.8–329.9), respectively. The total number of marginal bone level double measurements (mesial and distal sides of each implant) was 2909. FPDs with cantilever presented an estimated greater MBL over time compared to FPDs without cantilever. Bruxism, sex (women), implant (modified) surface, and (poor) bone quality were also associated with higher MBL over time.ConclusionsThe use of a cantilever extension is suggested to negatively affect the bone marginal level over time around implants supporting 3-unit FPDs. Due to the small difference of the estimated MBL over long periods of follow-up between the groups, it is a matter of debate if the observed negative effect may be of clinical significance.Graphical

Less marginal bone loss around bone-level implants restored with long abutments: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

The aim of this study was to investigate the biological outcomes of bone-level implants restored with long vs. short abutments, with regard to the 'one abutment at one time' protocol. The systematic search was performed in five databases: MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, and CENTRAL for randomized controlled trials up to January 14, 2023. Data were collected for marginal bone loss, bleeding on probing, and probing pocket depth by two reviewers. As effect size measure, mean difference (MD), and risk ratio (RR) were used for continuous and categorical outcomes, R-statistics software was used for conducting statistical analyses. For quality and certainty assessment, Risk of Bias Tool 2, ROBINS-I, and GRADE approach were used. The search resulted in 4055 records without any duplicates. After title, abstract, and full-text analysis, eight articles were found eligible for inclusion. Bone-level and platform-switched implants presented less marginal bone loss after 6 months and 1 year as well, when long abutments were used (MD 0.63, 95% CI: [-0.16; 1.42]) and (MD 0.26, 95% CI: [-0.02; 0.53]). However, subgroup analysis revealed no difference in marginal bone loss when applying 'one abutment at one time' protocol (p = 0.973). Bleeding on probing and probing pocket depth presented similarly good results in both groups without almost any differences (RR 0.97, 95% CI: [0.76; 1.23]) and (MD -0.05, 95% CI: [-1.11; 1.01]). Longer abutments on bone-level implants seem to be a favorable choice for decreasing early marginal bone loss, irrespective of connection timing.

Clinical outcomes of implant-supported and tooth-supported fixed prostheses fabricated from digital versus analogue impression: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

To analyze the clinical outcomes of implant-supported prostheses and tooth-supported fixed prostheses, fabricated from digital and conventional impression. The literature search was carried out on two electronic databases (PubMed and Cochrane Library). Randomized controlled trials (RCT) published from January 2011 to September 2022 were included. The bias risk was evaluated using Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. Further screening was done for meta-analysis according to modified Newcastle-Ottawa scoring criteria. Forest plot was generated using a statistical method of inverse variance of random effect with 95% confidence interval. A total of 8 randomized controlled trials were included for systematic review out of which four studies were based on tooth-supported fixed prosthesis and remaining four were based on implant-supported prosthesis. Further screening was conducted and three studies were eligible for meta-analysis. Tooth-supported fixed prosthesis fabricated from digital impression showed no significant difference in the marginal fit in any region measured, except for occlusal region where conventional impression showed more favorable marginal fit. Implant-supported prosthesis fabricated from digital impression showed survival rates ranging from 97.3 to 100% and there was no statistically significant difference in marginal bone loss (p = 0.14). Implant-supported prostheses fabricated from digital and conventional impressions show no significant differences in their clinical outcomes. Tooth-supported fixed prostheses fabricated from digital impression have shown favorable findings in terms of marginal fit. Despite that, there is still lack of clinical trials with larger sample size and longer follow-up periods. Future studies that fulfill these two criteria are deemed necessary.

Clinical and radiographic results of crestal vs. subcrestal placement of implants in posterior areas: A split-mouth randomized controlled clinical trial.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the peri-implant soft tissue and marginal bone loss (MBL) around implants with platform-switching and internal conical connection placed at crestal and subcrestal levels in posterior areas. Nineteen partially edentulous patients with at least two adjacent missing teeth in posterior areas unilaterally or bilaterally were included. Forty-two implants were placed randomly at the crestal or subcrestal (1 mm) level in a split-mouth design. Implant-supported fixed dental prostheses with screw retention were delivered after 4 months of healing. Clinical and radiological measurements were performed at implant placement (T0), restoration delivery (T1), and 1-year follow-up after loading (T2). MBL was calculated as the change in distance from the implant-abutment interface to the first radiographically visible bone-implant contact. A repeated-measures mixed ANOVA followed by a paired Student's t-test with the Bonferroni correction was used for statistical analysis. p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Eighteen patients with thirty-eight implants completed the study at T2. The MBL was lower in the subcrestal group than in the crestal group (0.04 ± 0.08 vs. 0.17 ± 0.17 mm, p = 0.004). The peri-implant probing depth (PD) was 2.31 ± 0.48 mm in the subcrestal group and 1.92 ± 0.43 mm in the crestal group; this difference was statistically significant (p = 0.002). Intragroup comparison showed no significant differences in MBL, or PD around the crestal group and subcrestal group from T1 to T2. After 1 year of functional loading, subcrestal placement of implants with platform-switching and internal conical connection showed lower MBL and was associated with greater PD and peri-implant soft tissue height than implants placed at the crestal level.

Could Fixed Implants Be a Viable Treatment Option in Disabled Patients? A Clinical Retrospective Study.

To verify the survival rates and marginal bone loss (MBL) of implants in patients with different disability types. Clinical and radiographic assessments were performed in a total of 189 implants for fixed implant prostheses in 72 patients. Data were collected on loaded implants at least 1 year in function, and the mean observation time was 37.3 months. Implant survival was examined, and MBL was observed around the implants of two groups (mental disability vs physical disability) based on age, sex, implant location (anterior vs posterior), and prosthetic connection (internal vs external). Of the 189 implants, 4 failed; the total implant survival rate was 97.8% across a mean of 37.3 months. The cumulative survival rate at 85 months in a Kaplan-Meier survival curve analysis was 94.3% ± 3% in patients with mental disability and 50% ± 35.4% in patients with physical disability, which was a statistically significant difference between the disability groups (P = .006). Fisher exact test showed significant differences in MBL only with age (P < .001). The implant MBL by disability type-adjusted for age and observation period-showed significant differences in multiple linear regression analyses (P = .003). The implant survival rates in patients with disability were in line with those reported for nondisabled patients. The MBL of the implants was within the physiologic bone loss after implant loading. Implants in patients with mental disability showed higher cumulative survival rates than in patients with physical disability, but also a higher amount of MBL. Within the limitations of this study, dental implants for patients with disability are viable. These results can establish future implant treatment plans for this population. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2023;38:562-568. doi: 10.11607/jomi.9880.

Evaluation of Flapless Approach for Dental Implantation: A Prospective Clinical Study

Objective: The present study aims to evaluate the dental implant flapless technique as a successful treatment option for implant patients by assessing marginal bone loss after 3 months and post-operative pain.Methods: One hundred and twenty implants were placed in 40 patients. Two parameters were assessed post-operatively: marginal bone loss and pain; the difference in marginal bone loss (MBL) was measured based on an immediate post-operative OPG and another OPG taken three months after the surgery, and pain assessment was achieved using a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS) post-operatively for five days. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used, and as most of the data were not normally distributed, Mann-Whitney test was used for comparing the groups.Results: The present study's findings demonstrate that the average marginal bone loss (MBL) around the implant at three months using the flapless technique was 0.2± 0.1 mm. No implants failed to osseointegrate. There was no statistical MBL significance between male and female patients or between upper and lower jaw. This study shows significantly reduced post-operative pain in the flapless implant placement technique. Conclusions: The flapless approach is predictable when patient selection, meticulous planning, and precise surgical protocols are followed.

Marginal Bone Loss and Treatment Complications with Mandibular Overdentures Retained by Two Immediate or Conventionally Loaded Implants—A Randomized Clinical Trial

This study aimed to assess marginal bone loss and complication rates of mandibular overdentures retained on two implants with conventional and immediate loading protocols. Twenty edentulous patients were treated with mandibular two-implant-retained overdentures and new complete maxillary dentures. In one half of the sample, the implants were loaded immediately by VulkanLoc® abutments. In the counterpart group, these abutments were connected to the implants two months after implant placement (conventional protocol). Treatment outcomes were evaluated at 2, 6, and 12 months after implant placement. According to the pre- and post-insertion radiographs, there was a mean marginal bone loss of 0.25–0.59 mm (CI 95%) after 13.4 ± 2.1 months of follow-up. There were no significant differences between groups. The failure rate (percentage of implants failing per year) was slightly higher in the conventional loading group (14.0 ± 32.7%) than in the immediate loading group (8.3 ± 18.0%). The findings of the present study suggested that there were no differences in marginal bone loss observed at one year for immediately loaded implants (0.40–0.39 mm) versus conventionally loaded implants (0.44- 0.36 mm) placed for the retention of mandibular overdentures. There were no differences in primary and secondary stability of immediately loaded versus conventional implants; however, in the conventional loading group, stability increased significantly between implant placement compared at both 6 and 12 months post-placement.

Effect of the Lateral Bone Augmentation Procedure in Correcting Peri-Implant Bone Dehiscence Defects: A 7-Years Retrospective Study

Guided bone regeneration (GBR) is a well-documented and widely-used dental surgical procedure for the treatment of various types of alveolar bone defects. The aim of the study was to evaluate the long-term effectiveness of the GBR procedure in correcting small peri-implant bone dehiscence using the xenogeneic deproteinized bovine bone mineral material and a xenogeneic native bilayer collagen membrane. The present study was designed as a retrospective study. Seventy-five bone-level tapered two-piece dental implants Conelog®, Camlog (Biotechnologies AG, Switzerland) were divided into two groups G1—no bone augmentation (no GBR)—44 implants and G2—bone augmentation (GBR)—31 implants. For both groups, the closed healing protocol with a primary wound closure was used. The incidence of peri-implantits was evaluated, the quantitative assessment of soft tissue thickness was performed using the ultrasound (USG) device, quantitative assessment of marginal bone loss (MBL) was done. The prevalence of peri-implantitis was 5.3%, with a three-fold increase in peri-implantitis comparing the groups without and with bone augmentation (G1 = 2.27%, G2 = 9.7%). The average keratinized gingiva thickness was 1.87 mm and did not differ significantly between groups. No statistically significant differences in MBL between G1 and G2 were found. When dividing patients by gender, no statistically significant differences were observed. When dividing patients by age groups, statistically significant differences were observed between the youngest and oldest groups of patients. Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that the use of xenogeneic bone and a xenogeneic collagen membrane in a GBR procedure can be recommended to correct small peri-implant bone dehiscence.

Comparison of marginal bone loss in SLA and RBM implants: A prospective cohort study.

The study aims to answer the following question: Among the patients who received a dental implant, is there any difference in marginal bone loss (MBL) between sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) and resorbable blast media (RBM) implants? The study aimed to evaluate marginal bone loss in SLA and RBM implants one year after loading. A Prospective Cohort Study. In this prospective cohort study with a pre-protocol population, subjects were assigned into two groups: Subjects received SLA implants in group 1 and RBM in group 2. MBL was assessed 12 months after loadings through digital parallel radiographs. An Independent t-test was used to compare MBL between the two groups. Sixty-six implants were studied (each group 33 implants). The mean of MBL in the RBM group was significantly higher than the SLA group (1.39 ± 0.31 mm, 0.89 ± 0.26 mm, respectively, P < 0.001). MBL in the mesial sides of implants in the RBM group was significantly higher than the SLA group (1.28 ± 0.29 mm, 0.8 ± 0.29 mm, respectively, P < 0.001). Analysis of the data demonstrated a significantly higher mean of MBL in the distal sides of implants in the RBM group than in the SLA group (1.51 ± 0.35 mm, 0.97 ± 0.27 mm, respectively, P < 0.001). In both groups, the mean of MBL on the distal side was significantly higher than on the mesial side (P < 0.05). Within this study's limitation, RBM implants showed significantly more MBL than SLA implants.

Marginal Bone Loss and Clinical Complications in Surviving Implants and Recently Placed Implants Splinted Together: A Retrospective Study.

The objective of this study was to compare marginal bone loss (MBL) and clinical complications between surviving implants (SIs) and recently placed implants (RIs) splinted together to support a fixed partial restoration (FPR). This retrospective study employed the medical records of patients treated with implant-supported FPRs in the Maccabi-Dent Dental Clinic. Patients were included if they were over the age of 18 years, were treated with RIs adjacent to existing SIs that had previously supported FPRs for more than 1 year, and the RIs and SIs were splinted to support new FPRs. Patients who did not receive annual follow-up or whose records had nondiagnostic radiographs or lacked sufficient restorative data were excluded. MBL was assessed at the last available radiograph and compared to one taken 1 year after loading the splinted RIs and SIs together. Clinical complication data were gathered from patient records. The medical records of 1,907 patients treated with a total of 7,306 implants were examined. Data from 187 implants were extracted from 46 patient records that met the inclusion criteria, with 96 RIs and 91 SIs supporting 56 FPRs. Mean followup was 39 ± 17.5 months. During the follow-up, two implants failed. The overall survival rate was 98.94% (98.96% in RIs and 98.91% in SIs), and the mean MBL in all implants was 0.41 ± 0.58 mm (0.4 ± 0.53 mm in RIs and 0.42 ± 0.45 mm in SIs). Peri-implantitis was reported in eight (4.3%) implants (four RIs and four SIs), screw loosening was reported in nine (4.8%) implants (three RIs and six SIs), ceramic chipping was reported in three (5.3%) restorations supported by four RIs and six SIs, and decementation was reported in one (1.8%) restoration supported by one RI and one SI. There was no statistically significant difference in survival rate, MBL, peri-implantitis, or screw loosening between RIs and SIs. There was no statistically significant difference in MBL or clinical complications between RIs and SIs. Splinting RIs and SIs for new prosthetic restoration support is a reasonable treatment choice with a high implant survival rate, low incidence of complications, and acceptable MBL.

Comparison between bone height changes around the splinted and non-splinted OT bridge system implants in edentulous mandibles rehabilitated with all-on four full arch prosthesies a randomized clinical trial

Objectives: the aim of this study was to compare the difference in marginal bone loss around the splinted and non-splinted implants supported on OT bridge system in full arch implant mandibular restoration using the All-On -Four concept. Materials and methods: This study was conducted on 12 completely edentulous patients having 48 implants. All patients were treated with a mandibular implant supported fixed restoration. Four implants were placed interforaminally for each patient and restored with immediately loaded restoration following the All-On-Four concept. Comparison was made between the splinted implants and non-splinted implants of immediately loaded temporary conversion prosthesis using OT bridge system regarding the marginal bone loss (MBL) using digital periapical radiograph at base line and after 3 months. Results: The marginal bone loss around both groups splinted and non-splinted implants after 3 months of immediate loading was similar with no statistically significant difference. Conclusion: Both techniques are considered as reliable methods for immediate loading of a full arch screw retained implant restoration with no preference of one approach regarding marginal bone loss around implants.

Prosthetic emergence angle in different implant sites and their correlation with marginal bone loss: A retrospective study

Background/purposeThe impact of prosthetic contour on peri-implant health has attracted increasing attention. This study aimed to evaluate the emergence angles in different implant sites and analyze the correlation between emergence angle and marginal bone loss (MBL). Materials and methodsSingle-crown implants with at least 5 years of follow-up were investigated in this retrospective study. Emergence angles and MBL were measured via digital radiography. The differences in emergence angles in different implant sites were analyzed using a one-way analysis of variance. Mann–Whitney U test was used to analyze the differences in MBL between groups (emergence angle> 30° and ≤30°), and Spearman's rank analysis was used to analyze the correlation between emergence angle and MBL. ResultsA total of 502 single-crown implants were included. For the mean mesial and distal emergence angles of different implant sites, the anterior position were 21.67 ± 10.80 (°) and 22.48 ± 12.78 (°), and the premolar were 26.29 ± 12.78 (°) and 24.30 ± 10.07 (°), and the molar were 34.53 ± 13.27 (°) and 34.48 ± 13.58 (°) respectively. The emergence angles of molar implant sites were significantly greater than those of anterior and premolar (P < 0.001). The Mann–Whitney U test and Spearman's rank analysis revealed that there was no correlation between emergence angle and MBL. ConclusionThere were significant differences in the emergence angles at different implant sites. However, when considering factors such as different sites or types of implants, there was no correlation between emergence angle and MBL, and more comprehensive research should be conducted in the future.

Comparison of marginal bone loss in implant supported over dentures in early loading

Aim: The purpose of the present research was to evaluate the marginal bone loss in implant supported over-dentures in case of early loading on denture. Methodology: 36 edentulous participants (mean age 68 years, SD 9.2) were randomly assigned into three treatment groups (n¼12). A single implant was placed in the mandibular midline of participants to support an overdenture using a 6-week loading protocol. The control group received Southern regular implants and standard ball attachments. One group received Southern 8-mm-wide implants and large ball attachments. Another group received Neoss regular implants and Locator attachments. SPSS was used to determine between groups differences in marginal bone loss, implant stability, implant, and prosthodontic success (P&lt;0.05). Results: Implant success after 1 year was 75% for Southern regular implant (control) group; and 100% for the Southern wide and Neoss regular implant groups (P¼0.038). Prosthodontic success was comparable between the groups but the maintenance (41 events overall, mean 1.2) was greater for the Locator and the standard ball attachments. Conclusion: Mandibular single-implant overdentures are a successful treatment option for older edentulous adults with early loading protocol using implants of different diameters and with different attachment systems.

Long-term clinical outcomes of short implant (6mm) in relation to Implant Disease Risk Assessment (IDRA).

To evaluate the long-term survival of short implants and to investigate the association of the Implant Disease Risk Assessment (IDRA) with the occurrence of biological complications. This study was designed as a cohort study with a median follow-up of 10.0years. Patients who had received 6-mm implants were reviewed and assigned into low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups (Group L, M, and H) based on the IDRA tool. The implant survival, biological complications, soft tissue condition, hardware complications, and marginal bone loss (MBL) were evaluated. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression were performed for survival analysis. A hundred and ten patients were included. The overall cumulative survival rate was 90.9% (L:100.0%, M: 93.3%, and H: 80.6%). A higher risk profile was significantly associated with a decreased implant survival (hazard ratio: 4.11, 95% CI: 1.17-14.36, p<.05). Higher risk profile (hazard ratio: 2.63, 95% CI: 1.32-5.25, p<.05) was a potential risk factor for biological complications. At follow-up, significant differences in bleeding index, modified plaque index, and peri-implant probing depth were found among groups (p<.01). No significant difference was found in MBL. Acceptable long-term clinical outcomes could be achieved after 10years for short implants. Despite a statistically nonsignificant difference in MBL, patients with a high-risk profile of IDRA seem to be at greater risk of implant loss and biological complications.

Improvement in Osseointegration of Titanium Dental Implants After Exposure to Ultraviolet-C Light for Varied Durations: An Experimental Study in Beagle Dogs

Ultraviolet-mediated photofunctionalization is a valid technology for enhancing the osseointegration of titanium implants. However, there is no consensus on the effective exposure time to ultraviolet light. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of different exposure times of ultraviolet-C (UVC) light on aged titanium implants and explore the optimal treatment duration of UVC photofunctionalization for osseointegration in an animal model. Eight male beagle dogs (n=48) were divided into a control group (n=12) and 3 experimental groups (n=12/12/12) which received 4-week-old implants without UVC treatment (C) or treated with UVC for 1/6hour, 1/2hour, and 1hour (UVC-1/6hour, UVC-1/2hour, UVC-1hour) immediately before placement. All the implants were placed 12weeks after mandibular premolars extraction. Four dogs were euthanized after 4 and 12weeks of healing, respectively. The marginal bone level and implant stability quotient were measured at implant placement and after sacrifice. Subsequently, micro-CT and histomorphometric analyses were performed following block harvesting. No significant difference in marginal bone loss between the UVC-untreated and UVC-treated groups was found at 4 or 12weeks. At 4weeks, significantly higher BV/TV and bone-implant contact were observed in the UVC groups than in the C group, irrespective of the UVC-photofunctionalization duration (BV/TV: UVC-1/6hour 0.48±0.11, UVC-1/2hour 0.50±0.06, and UVC-1hour 0.47±0.08, C 0.34±0.04; bone-implant contact : UVC-1/6hour 84.30±5.02%, UVC-1/2hour 85.82±5.05%, and UVC-1hour 84.98±3.86%, C 71.69±3.52%. P<.05), whereas, no significant difference was observed among the UVC groups. At 12weeks, there were no significant differences between the C group and UVC groups. After 4 and 12weeks of healing, no significant difference in implant stability quotient values was observed between the C group and UVC groups. UVC photofunctionalization improved the early osseointegration of aged titanium implants. However, the effect was not dependent on the UVC-light duration within the range from 1/6hour to 1hour.

Long-Term Outcomes of Implants Placed in Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation with Porous Fluorohydroxyapatite (Algipore® FRIOS®) in Comparison with Anorganic Bovine Bone (Bio-Oss®) and Platelet Rich Plasma (PRP): A Retrospective Study.

Purpose: The objective of this retrospective study was to evaluate the long-term clinical outcomes of bone regeneration procedures using algae-derived plant hydroxyapatite (Algipore® FRIOS®) compared with demineralized anorganic bovine bone (Bio-Oss®), in combination with autologous blood-derived PRP. Materials and Methods: Partially edentulous patients with severe atrophy of posterior maxillary treated by means of the split bone technique in a two-stage grafting procedures were observed for up to seven years after implants placement. After surgeries, the natural porous fluorohydroxyapatite (FHA) (Algipore® FRIOS®; Group, n = 29) or anorganic bovine bone (Bio-Oss® Group, n = 28) with autogenous bone in a 50:50 composite ratio with PRP, were administered in a 2.8-mm critical-size defect (CSD). Four months later, implants were placed at second-stage surgery. Results: A sample of fifty-seven consecutive patients who required sinus augmentation was included in the study, and 57 implants were placed. There was no drop out or loss of follow-up of any case. Clinical and radiographic examinations revealed a comparable pattern of newly formed bone in both groups after seven years of functional loading for implants placed after sinus augmentation using porous fluorohydroxyapatite and anorganic bovine bone. No significant difference in marginal bone loss was found around implants in both groups. Conclusions: The favorable implant outcomes suggest both biomaterials are suitable for sinus grafting in severely atrophic maxillae.