One-piece Implants Research Articles

Impact of keratinized mucosa on implant-health related parameters: A 10-year prospective re-analysis study.

To investigate whether the lack of keratinized mucosa (KM) affects peri-implant health after 10 years of loading. Data from 74 patients with 148 implants from two randomized controlled studies comparing different implant systems were included and analyzed. Clinical parameters including bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), plaque index,marginal bone loss (MBL), and KM width (KMW) at buccal sites were collected at baseline (time of the final prosthesis insertion), 5-year and 10 years postloading. Multivariable logistic and linear regression models by means of a generalized estimated equation (GEE) were used to evaluate the influence of buccal KM on peri-implant clinical parameters; BOP, MBL, PD, and adjusted for implant type (one-piece or two-piece) and compliance. A total of 35 (24.8%) implants were healthy, 67 (47.5%) had mucositis and 39 (27.6%) were affected by peri-implantitis. In absence of buccal KM (KM = 0 mm), 75% of the implants exhibited mucositis, while in the presence of KM (KMW >0 mm) 41.2% exhibited mucositis. Regarding peri-implantitis, the corresponding percentages were 20% (KM = 0 mm) and 26.7% (KM >0 mm). Unadjusted logistic regression showed that the presence of buccal KM tended to reduce the odds of showing BOP at buccal sites (OR: 0.28 [95% CI, 0.07 to 1.09], p = 0.06). The adjusted logistic regression model revealed that having buccal KM (OR: 0.21 [95% CI, 0.05 to 0.85], p = 0.02) and using two-piece implants (OR: 0.34 [95% CI, 0.15 to 0.75], p = 0.008) significantly reduced the odds of showing BOP. Adjusted linear regression by means of GEE showed that KM and two-piece implants were associated with reduced MBL and MBL changes (p < 0.05). The lack of buccal KM appears to be linked with peri-implant parameters such as BOP and MBL, but the association is weak. The design of one-piece implants may account for their increased odds of exhibiting BOP.

Biological Width around One- and Two-piece Implants: A Systematic Review

The concept of biological width (BW) around dental implants is crucial for the long-term success of implant placement. This systematic review aimed to investigate the differences in BW around one- and two-piece dental implants and to assess the impact of implant design on peri-implant soft tissues. To compare biological width around one-piece and two-piece implant in a population undergone implant treatment. A comprehensive search of MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar was conducted to identify studies that compared the BW around one- and two-piece dental implants. Eligibility criteria included published peer-reviewed studies that provided quantitative measurements of BW and related soft-tissue dimensions. Data extraction and synthesis were performed, and the findings were compared for consistency and relevance to the research question. The review included four studies that met the inclusion criteria. Two studies suggested that two-piece implants might lead to an adaptive change in BW and marginal bone levels over time. One study indicated that one-piece implants could maintain a BW and gingival margin position similar to that of natural teeth, while another found no significant long-term differences in soft-tissue volumetric stability between the one- and two-piece systems. The evidence pointed toward the microgap and implant design as influential factors in determining peri-implant soft-tissue dimensions. We found that implant design, particularly the presence of a microgap, plays a significant role in the establishment and maintenance of BW around dental implants. Two-piece implants may induce a greater adaptation in BW, whereas one-piece implants may better mimic the natural soft-tissue architecture. Long-term volumetric stability of the soft tissues appeared to be comparable between the two systems. These findings can inform clinical decision-making regarding the choice of implant systems for optimal soft-tissue health and integration.

Italian School One Piece Implants Stabilized with Electrowelded Titanium Needle for The Rehabilitation in Aesthetic Area of Single Post-Extraction Edentulies with Immediate Loading

The stabilization of an one piece implant with an electrowelded titanium needle is a technique introduced at the end of the seventies of the last century to increase the primary stability, already acquired by means of the wide thread and bicorticalism, of the one-piece implants of the Italian school such as the Tramonte screw, especially in immediate loading rehabilitations of single edentulous upper front teeth and thus make the success of immediate loading predictable. The stabilization of a one piece implant is achieved by inserting a titanium needle (Scialom type) divergent from the axis of the main implant, a needle which must reach and impact the deep cortical bone and be welded with the intraoral welding machine to the one piece basic screw, to form a single prosthetic abutment. In addition to enhancing primary stability and increasing resistance to static and dynamic stress, given that by forming a single body with the implant it extends the support surface over a larger surface, needle stabilization also carries out an anti-rotational action, opposing the "unscrewing" effect that can be caused by the pressure exerted by the tongue during swallowing. Needle stabilization also helps to avoid those micromovements which, when they exceed 150 microns, can prevent the osseointegration process, leading to the failure of the immediate loading implant. Needle stabilization has proven to be particularly effective in the immediate loading of post-extraction single implants in the upper frontal sectors, with reduced bone depth, or with poorly mineralized bone.

Characteristics and Risk Factors for the Fracture of One-Piece Implants.

The one-piece dental implant was originally designed to overcome the structural weaknesses of the two-piece implant. However, a fractured one-piece implant requires removal because the abutment cannot be repaired or replaced to support new prosthetic restorations. The aim of this study was to clarify the features and risk factors for fracture of the one-piece implant. This study was designed as a retrospective case series research. The subjects were patients who were treated for fractures of the one-piece implant at a clinic in Japan between 2012 and 2021. Fractures of the one-piece implant were diagnosed by cone-beam computed tomography, and the association between age and duration from implant placement to fracture was analyzed by one-way ANOVA followed by the Tukey test. Eighteen patients and 20 one-piece implants (under 39years: 5 patients and 6 implants; 40-59years: 7 patients and 7 implants; over 60years: 6 patients and 7 implants) had fractures in their one-piece implants. Of the fractured implants, 11 had a diameter of 3mm, and 9 had a diameter of 4mm. The mean durations up to implant fracture were 662days in the younger group, 1467days in the middle group, and 1239days in older group, and the duration was significantly shorter in the younger group. In addition, 83.3% of fracture implants in the younger group were in the molar region. All fractures of the one-piece implants occurred under the bone margin. Two patients had torus mandibularis, and 1 patient was had bruxism. One-piece implants in younger patients that are located in the lower molar position are the most susceptible to implant fracture, and the fracture occurred under the bone margin in all cases.

Computer Aided Full Arch Restoration by Means of One-Piece Implants and Stackable Guide: A Technical Note.

This technical note aims to present a recently developed computer-guided protocol characterized by titanium-reinforced stackable surgical guides during post-extractive implant placement and subsequent immediate loading. A full maxillary edentulism was rehabilitated with one-piece implants, starting from a pre-existing removable denture. 3D digital scans of the removable denture and upper and lower arches were performed. On this basis, a prototype with ideal esthetic and functional outcomes was realized and replicated into a custom-made radiological stent with markers. The superimposition of STL and DICOM files allowed virtual planning of one-piece implants in the ideal prosthetically driven position. The stackable guides, composed of a fixed base template and additional removable components, were then realized. The fixed template, initially secured with anchor pins to the bone, was no longer removed. The removable components, which were screwed to the base template, were used to perform implant surgery and immediate prosthetic loading. No surgical complications occurred, the implants achieved a minimum insertion torque of 35 Ncm, and immediate prosthetic loading was performed. The base template allowed for the maintenance of a fixed reference during the entire workflow, improving the transition between the digital project, the surgical procedure, and the prosthetic rehabilitation.

Radiographic and Clinical Evaluation of Implant Prosthetic Treatment with One Piece versus Two Piece Dental Implants: A Comparative Prospective Study.

Dental implants are designed to ensure natural tooth replacement based on improved design, simplified placement, and long-term survival. This study aimed to compare one-piece implant (OPI) and two-piece implant (TPI) to determine the success rate over the TPI. This study conducted on 15 patients selected with the age range of 20-60 years to place OPI and TPI. The surgical consent form duly signed by the patients was procured. The implants used were of Adin Implant System, and a follow-up examination was done at 3, 6, and 9 months after implant loading and various clinical and radiographic parameters were noted for both OPI and TPI. The clinical parameters measured were Silness, and Loe gingival index and probing depth and the radiographic parameters included crestal marginal bone loss. Independent Sample t-test and ANOVA were used for statistical analysis. The statistical analysis showed no significant difference between the OPI and TPI based on the gingival index, probing depth, and crestal bone loss. On the contrary, there was a statistical significance in comparing the same parameters during the follow-up period of 3, 6, and 9 months. Over a protracted period, OPIs are better than TPIs by the design and placement procedure. Further research with a higher sample size shall possibly establish esoteric results on a large scale.

Thermal Changes of One-Piece Versus Two-Piece Implants During Setting of an Autopolymerized Acrylic Resin.

Purpose: To evaluate differences in the temperature rise at the cervical area of one-piece vs two-piece implants during the setting of relined provisional crowns. Materials and Methods: A K-type thermocouple was fixed to the coronal thread of 15 one-piece implants and 15 two-piece implants that were mounted on a plexiglass apparatus. Baseline temperature (Bl Temp) was recorded before starting the curing process. The maximum temperature (Max Temp) reached during the process in both implant groups was also recorded. Total heat flux (THF) was calculated as well as the thermal amplitude (Temp-Amp) at the implant surface. Finally, the differences between the implant types were compared using unpaired t test. Results: The increase in temperature from baseline was statistically significantly greater in the one-piece implants than in the two-piece implants (P < .01). Similarly, the THF and Temp-Amp were significantly greater in the one-piece implants compared to two-piece implants (P < .01). Conclusions: The polymerization of PMMA-based resin temporary crowns produces a significant temperature rise in both one-piece and two-piece implants. It is advisable to use two-piece implants to restore immediately loaded implants to reduce the risk to implant surroundings that may occur due to the temperature rise at the implant neck.

Revitalizing Worn-Out Overdenture Attachments in One-Piece Implant Cases using Silicone Matrix System: A Case Report

The case report discusses the use of a silicone matrix system for salvaging worn-out overdenture attachments in one-piece implant cases. It highlights the effectiveness of this technique and presents a detailed case study. One-piece or single-piece implant systems, where the intraosseous and abutment portions with the stud attachments consist of one unit, do not allow changing the worn-out abutment individually if required, thus ruling out any further use of implant and abutment once the attachment component faces extensive irreversible wearing. The ‘Retention. Sil’ – an additional curing elastomeric material in salvaging worn-out attachments of one-piece implants, emphasizes the revitalization process and effective use as an attachment for implant-retained overdenture, thereby extending the clinical use of one-piece implants and avoiding extensive invasive procedures in geriatric patients.

Single geometry abutment for narrow and extra-narrow implant systems: Survival and failure modes

The use of identical prosthetic components for all implant diameters could reduce the production costs by companies and the complexity of component selection for the clinician and his team. However, it would imply in reduction of thickness of the cervical walls of tapered internal connection implants, which could compromise the reliability of narrow and extra-narrow implants. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the probability of survival and failure modes of extra-narrow implant systems with the same internal diameter as standard-diameter implants using the same prosthetic components. It was used eigth different implant system configurations, including narrow (Ø 3.3 mm) (N) extra-narrow (Ø 2.9 mm) (EN) and extra-narrow-scalloped (Ø 2.9 mm) (ENS) implants, both with cementable abutments (Ce) or titanium bases (Tib) and one-piece implants (Ø 2.5 mm and Ø 3.0 mm) (OP) (Medens, Itu, SP, Brazil), comprising the following groups: OP 3.0; OP 2.5; N Ce; N Tib; EN Ce, EN Tib, ENS-Ce and ENS-Tib. The implants were embedded using polymethylmethacrylate acrylic resin in a 15 mm matrix. Standardized maxillary central incisor crowns were virtually designed and milled to fit on the different studied abutments and cemented using a dual self-adhesive resin cement. The specimens were submitted to SSALT (Step Stress Accelerated Life Testing) at 15 Hz in water until failure or suspension of the test, until a maximum load of 500 N. Fractographic analysis of the failed specimens were realized in scanning electron microscopy. All implant systems demonstrated high probability of survival (90–100%) for missions at 50 and 100 N and values of characteristic strength superior to 139 N. Failure modes were restricted to the abutment in all the implant configurations tested. Therefore, the use extra-narrow implants with standardized prosthetic components for different implant diameters is a viable option for the replacement of anterior teeth.

Ceramic Dental Implants: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Purpose: To evaluate the performance of one- and two-piece ceramic implants regarding implant survival and success and patient satisfaction. Materials and Methods: This review followed the PRISMA 2020 guidelines using PICO format and analyzed clinical studies of partially or completely edentulous patients. The electronic search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) keywords related to dental zirconia ceramic implants, and 1,029 records were received for detailed screening. The data obtained from the literature were analyzed by single-arm, weighted meta-analyses using a random-effects model. Forest plots were used to synthesize pooled means and 95% CI for the change in marginal bone level (MBL) for short-term (1 year), mid-term (2 to 5 years), and long-term (over 5 years) follow-up time intervals. Results: Among the 155 included studies, the case reports, review articles, and preclinical studies were analyzed for background information. A meta-analysis was performed for 11 studies for one-piece implants. The results indicated that the MBL change after 1 year was 0.94 ± 0.11 mm, with a lower bound of 0.72 and an upper bound of 1.16. For the mid term, the MBL was 1.2 ± 0.14 mm with a lower bound of 0.92 and an upper bound of 1.48. For the long term, the MBL change was 1.24 ± 0.16 mm with a lower bound of 0.92 and an upper bound of 1.56. Conclusion: Based on this literature review, one-piece ceramic implants achieve osseointegration similar to titanium implants, with a stable MBL or a slight bone gain after an individual initial design depending on crestal remodeling. The risk of implant fracture is low for current commercially available implants. Immediate loading or temporization of the implants does not interfere with the course of osseointegration. Scientific evidence for two-piece implants is rare.

Survival and Fracture rates of One-Piece Zirconia Implants: A Systematic review

Introduction: The implementation of endosseous showed expected outcomes related to survival and successful oral management. Nowadays, interest in achieving an excellent esthetic outcome increased in implant dentistry. Dental implants’ aesthetic outcomes demand understanding of fundamental biological principles and proficiency in various surgical procedures. Titanium alloys and titanium are the gold standards as a material of choice. Evaluate the rate of survival and fracture by dental implants of one-piece zirconia with a year follow-up history. Methodology: This study was based on a systematic review, carried out through PubMed, Embase and Medline databases considering clinical studies only from 2016–2022 published data. Results: Eleven articles were selected out of 1024 initially. Evaluated a total number of 658 one-piece implants, with follow-ups from 1–7 years. The comprehensive survival and fracture rate of one-piece zirconia implants is 87.7 % and 4.9% after at least a year of function. Z-system Zirconia implants showed the highest fracture rate among other systems. Conclusion: Zirconia dental implants are a promising solution to replace missing tooth/teeth, especially in the case of Titanium allergy, or in patients with sub-optimal soft tissue conditions can lead to poor esthetic results. However, more clinical practice is required to determine the effective implants with fewer complications.

Subcrestal Positioning of Implants with a Convergent Hyperbolic Collar Profile: An Experimental Study in Dogs.

To evaluate the influence on peri-implant soft and hard tissues of one-piece implants with a convergent hyperbolic profile collar placed at different depths with respect to the bone crest. Six dogs were included in the experiment. Three months after mandibular tooth extractions, two one-piece implants carrying a 2.8-mm-high convergent hyperbolic profile collar were placed in the alveolar crest with the coronal margin of the rough surface either 0.8 mm (test-1) or 1.8 mm (test-2) deeper with respect to the bone crest (Ct0). Two similar implants were instead placed flush to Ct0 as controls (control-1 and control-2, respectively). Healing screws were connected, and nonsubmerged healing was allowed. After 4 months, block sections were harvested, and histologic slides were prepared in a buccolingual plane. In the histologic analyses, both the buccal crest and coronal level of osseointegration were located more coronally at the test compared to the control implants concerning the implant. However, the buccal bone crest with respect to Ct0 presented a loss of 0.8 ± 0.4 mm at the test-1 and 0.5 ± 0.4 mm at the control-1 implants (P = .028), and a loss of 2.0 ± 1.0 mm and 0.7 ± 0.4 mm at the test-2 and control-2 implants (P = .028), respectively. At the control implants, the collars were exposed above the peri-implant mucosa, while those of the test implants were not. However, the coronal level of the peri-implant mucosa with respect to Ct0 was located more apically at the test compared to the control implants. The placement of implants with a hyperbolic convergent profile collar in the subcrestal position resulted in higher buccal bone resorption and more soft tissue recession compared to the crestal implants with respect to the level of the bone crest at placement.

Fracture analysis of one/two-piece clinically failed zirconia dental implants

ObjectivesAnalyzing factors that may have led to fracture of zirconia implants by macro/micro-fractography. MethodsSix one-piece and ten two-piece full-ceramic zirconia implants from two manufacturers, Z-Systems and CeraRoot, were retrieved after clinical failure. The time-to-failure ranged from 3 to 49 months. Optical and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) were used to analyze the fracture planes at the macro- and microscopic level. Treatment planning, surgical protocol, fracture-origin location and characteristic fracture features were assessed. ResultsThe fracture of all implants seemed to have been primarily due to overload in bending mode, while the fracture-initiation sites varied for the one- and two-piece implants. The fracture of all one-piece implants originated in the constriction region between two threads in the endosseous implant part. For two-piece implants, the abutment neck, internal abutment-implant connections and inner threads were found to be the main fracture-initiation sites. Surface defects at the root area for one-piece implants and damages at the abutment surface for two-piece implants were connected to the fracture origins. Importantly, the clinical failures of implants were often found to result from combined effects related to patient aspects, treatment planning/protocols, a high bending moment at the weakest link, implant-surface conditions and specific implant designs. SignificanceThis study provided information to be considered for future optimization of treatment planning and the surgical protocol for zirconia implants. Optimization of the surface conditions and the zirconia-starting powder were also suggested.

Zirconia versus Titanium Implants: 8-Year Follow-Up in a Patient Cohort Contrasted with Histological Evidence from a Preclinical Animal Model.

Zirconia ceramic (ZC) implants are becoming more common, but comparisons between preclinical histology and long-term clinical trials are rare. This investigation comprised (1) 8-year clinical follow-up of one-piece ZC or titanium (Ti) implants supporting full overdentures and (2) histomorphometric analysis of the same implants in an animal model, comparing implants with various surface treatments. Methods: (1) Clinical trial: 24 completely edentulous participants (2 groups of N = 12) received 7 implants (one-piece ball-abutment ZC or Ti; maxilla N = 4, mandible N = 3) restored with implant overdentures. Outcomes after 8-years included survival, peri-implant bone levels, soft-tissue responses, and prosthodontic issues. (2) Preclinical trial: 10 New Zealand sheep received 4 implants bilaterally in the femoral condyle: Southern Implants ZC or Ti one-piece implants, identical to the clinical trial, and controls: Southern ITC® two-piece implants with the same surface or Nobel (NBC) anodised (TiUnite™) surface. %Bone-implant contact (%BIC) was measured after 12 weeks of unloaded healing. Results: 8 of 24 participants (33%) of an average age of 75 ± 8 years were recalled; 21% of original participants had died, and 46% could not be contacted. 80.4% of implants survived; excluding palatal sites, 87.5% of Ti and 79% of ZC implants survived. All failed implants were in the maxilla. Three ZC implants had fractured. Bone loss was similar for Ti vs. ZC; pocket depths (p = 0.04) and attachment levels (p = 0.02) were greater for Ti than ZC implants. (1.7 ± 1.6 mm vs. 1.6 ± 1.3 mm). All implants in sheep femurs survived. %BIC was not statistically different for one-piece blasted surface Ti (80 ± 19%) versus ZC (76 ± 20%) or ITC® (75 ± 16 mm); NBC had significantly higher %BIC than ITC (84 ± 17%, p = 0.4). Conclusion: Short-term preclinical results for ZC and Ti one-piece implants showed excellent bone-implant contact in unloaded femoral sites. This differed from the long-term clinical results in older-aged, edentulous participants. While ZC and Ti implants showed equivalent performance, the risks of peri-implantitis and implant loss in older, completely edentulous patients remain a significant factor.

Full Mouth Implant Rehabilitation Using Fixed Detachable Bio-HPP Frameworks in the Presence of One-piece Implants: A Clinical Report

Background: The purpose of this case report is to describe a case of full arch rehabilitation in the maxilla and mandible using fixed detachable BioHPP frameworks veneered with prefabricated veneers in the presence of one-piece implants. Methods and findings: A 63-year-old male patient presented with a maxillary acrylic resin fixed restoration supported on six implants and a mandibular implant retained overdenture on two one-piece implants. Five implants were placed in the mandible in addition to the existing two one-piece implants using CAD/CAM surgical guides. Steps for prosthetic construction of the final full arch BioHPP restorations were completed. The mandibular BioHPP framework was relieved during construction to accommodate the one-piece implants. Cement was applied to fill the space in the framework above the one-piece implants. Conclusion: Full arch screw-retained restorations can be fabricated in the presence of one-piece implants without sectioning of the abutment part to avoid patient discomfort and heat generation. The low modulus of elasticity of BioHPP along with prefabricated PMMA veneers provided a major advantage over other materials by dampening the occlusal forces and reducing debonding rates.

EAO Position Paper: Current Level of Evidence Regarding Zirconia Implants in Clinical Trials.

Titanium oral implants are still considered "state of the art" in implant dentistry, with well-documented survival rates. However, their grayish color and high prevalence of peri-implant infections have resulted in controversial discussion as to whether tooth-like-colored, metal-free zirconia ceramic implants provide sufficient potential to be considered equal regarding treatment outcomes. The present position paper has been composed upon invitation by the European Association of Osseointegration in order to provide an update on the current level of evidence regarding zirconia implants in clinical trials. To date, most available and scientifically documented zirconia implant systems are one-piece implants that require an experienced surgeon and prosthodontist due to the restricted flexibility in cases of compromised angulation or vertical positioning. Taking this limitation into account, there is evidence of a comparable outcome for one-piece zirconia implants compared to titanium implants for the fixed replacement of one to three missing teeth. In contrast, currently available clinical data evaluating two-piece zirconia implants with an adhesively bonded implant-abutment interface suggest an inferior outcome. Data evaluating the clinical applicability of screw-retained solutions, even if revealing sufficient fracture resistance in laboratory investigations, are still missing. High survival rates were reported for all-ceramic reconstructions supported by zirconia implants, but with increased technical complications; ie, fractures of the ceramic veneer in the case of bilayered restorations. Sufficient clinical evidence for recommending monolithic approaches is limited to single crowns.

Rotational Positioning of One-piece Implants in Computer-Guided Flapless Surgery and Immediate Loading Using the All-on-4 Concept

The aim of this clinical application is to assess the procedure of simultaneous insertion and rotational positioning of the one-piece implant (implant + Multi-Unit-Abutment) in order to achieve the right emergence angle of the abutment using reference points on the surgical guide. This clinical procedure is particularly useful in cases of immediate loading using the All-on-4 concept. The case is designed through dedicated software by virtually inserting the implants in the optimal position with respect to the prosthesis and the bone situation. The program automatically determines the position of the bushing and virtual modeling, printing and gluing of the bushing to the surgical guide are performed. The procedure ensures correct integrated Multi-Unit-Abutment rotational positioning done in one movement using both implant contra-angle or manual insertion. Results are appreciable both for the precision of the abutment emergence angles for prosthetic long-term biomechanical stability and for the absence of bacterial microfiltration in the abutment/implant interface. The clinical sequence is easy for the surgeon and time-saving. The surgeon is less stressed-out and the time needed is much less than standard procedure with Multi-Unit-Abutments screwing. This is facilitated by the reference points on the bushing. At the same time, further scientific evidence is needed and also the procedure must be integrated with the drilling undersized protocol for achieving the proper primary stability for All-on-4 immediate loading purposes. We think that this application needs clinical attention for reducing chair-time and stress-related procedures.

Full Digital Model-Free Maxillary Prosthetic Rehabilitation by Means of One-Piece Implants: A Proof of Concept Clinical Report with Three-Years Follow Up

Implant rehabilitation is a daily practice in dentistry, and patients often have heightened expectations regarding both the functional and the aesthetic outcome. Implant–abutment connection (IAC) is involved in the long-term aesthetic quality of the rehabilitation. The use of one-piece implants for fixing dentures may prevent the mechanical and biological implication of the implant–abutment interface, resulting in a better quality of hard and soft tissue maintenance. In this case report, we present a novel one-piece implant in a maxillary rehabilitation with a full model-free digital approach.

Comparative Evaluation of Crestal Bone Loss around Compression Screw Implants Placed in Healed Sites and Freshly Extracted Sockets

Aim: The aim of the study was to evaluate crestal bone loss around immediate loading compression screw implants.&#x0D; Study Design: A Randomized controlled clinical trial.&#x0D; Method: In this randomized study, 15 subjects with 30 edentulous sites in the maxillary and mandibular anterior regions (incisors and canines) willing for replacement were taken into consideration. A total of 14 implants were placed in healed sites and 16 implants were placed in freshly extracted sockets and immediately loaded in both groups. Provisional restoration was delivered on the same day of implant placement. Crestal bone loss was evaluated at baseline (immediately after implant placement), 1 month, and 4 months. The final prosthetic restoration was delivered after 4 months following implant placement.&#x0D; Results: No statistically significant difference for crestal bone loss was observed between delayed and immediate implant placement at 4 months interval.&#x0D; Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, immediate placement of one-piece implant produced crestal bone loss comparable to delayed placement. The unique design of a one-piece implants eliminates the fixture abutment interface (microgap) and resembles the natural tooth with a seamless transition of the radicular unit to the coronal unit. Therefore, in the maxillary and mandibular anterior regions, one-piece implants with immediate loading can be considered as a viable solution for the replacement of missing teeth with better esthetics.

Comparing the Primary and Secondary Stability of Compressive One-Piece Implants with Conometric Cap vs. Compressive-M Implants

Background: This research was conducted to assess and compare the stability of compressive one-piece implants with conometric caps and compressive-M implants (screw type) at the time of implant insertion, three months, and six months after insertion. Experimental: A total of 15 patients (8 females and 7 males) with a mean age of 54 ± 17.5 years participated in this study. A total of 82 implants from two implant designs (ROOTT Compressive implants with conometric caps and ROOTT Compressive-M implants with screw-type prosthesis) were placed in the lower premolar-molar areas using standard surgical protocols. The implant stability test (IST) readings were clinically measured by the Anycheck implant stability meter in both buccal and lingual directions immediately after insertion of the implant (T0), three months (T1), and six months (T2) after insertion. Results: The results displayed that the highest mean value was 63.17 using IST for Compressive implants with conometric caps on the buccal direction at T2, while the lowest mean value was 52.47 for Compressive-M implants with a screw-type prosthesis at T1. The comparison of mean values of IST showed statistically significant (P&lt;0.05) differences between Compressive implants and Compressive-M implants at T1 and T2 but non-significant differences at T0 in both buccal and lingual directions. The mean IST values for the 39 compressive implants in lingual direction were 61.83 at T0, 59.77 at T1, and 61.57 at T2, while the mean IST values for the 35 Compressive-M implants in the same order were 59.4, 51.2, and 52.13 at T0, T1, and T2, respectively. Conclusion: We found that the stability of Compressive conometric implants is higher than that of Compressive-M implants in both T1 and T2.