Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science

Korean Academy of Periodontology (대한치주과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Marginal bony changes in relation to different vertical positions of dental implants

  • Yi, Jung-Myung (Department of Periodontology and Research Institute of Oral Sciences, Gangneung-Wonju National University College of Dentistry) ;
  • Lee, Jae-Kwan (Department of Periodontology and Research Institute of Oral Sciences, Gangneung-Wonju National University College of Dentistry) ;
  • Um, Heung-Sik (Department of Periodontology and Research Institute of Oral Sciences, Gangneung-Wonju National University College of Dentistry) ;
  • Chang, Beom-Seok (Department of Periodontology and Research Institute of Oral Sciences, Gangneung-Wonju National University College of Dentistry) ;
  • Lee, Min-Ku (Department of Periodontics, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital)
  • Received : 2010.07.27
  • Accepted : 2010.09.29
  • Published : 2010.11.03
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to radiographically evaluate marginal bony changes in relation to different vertical positions of dental implants. Methods: Two hundred implants placed in 107 patients were examined. The implants were classified by the vertical positions of the fixture-abutment connection (microgap): 'bone level,' 'above bone level,' or 'below bone level.' Marginal bone levels were examined in the radiographs taken immediately after fixture insertion, immediately after second-stage surgery, 6 months after prosthesis insertion, and 1 year after prosthesis insertion. Radiographic evaluation was carried out by measuring the distance between the microgap and the most coronal bone-to-implant contact (BIC). Results: Immediately after fixture insertion, the distance between the microgap and most coronal BIC was $0.06{\pm}0.68\;mm$; at second surgery, $0.43{\pm}0.83\;mm$; 6 months after loading, $1.36{\pm}0.56\;mm$; and 1 year after loading, $1.53{\pm}0.51\;mm$ ($mean{\pm}SD$). All bony changes were statistically significant but the difference between the second surgery and the 6-month loading was greater than between other periods. In the 'below bone level' group, the marginal bony change between fixture insertion and 1 year after loading was about 2.25 mm, and in the 'bone level' group, 1.47 mm, and in 'above bone level' group, 0.89 mm. Therefore, the marginal bony change was smaller than other groups in the 'above bone level' group and larger than other groups in the 'below bone level' group. Conclusions: Our results demonstrated that marginal bony changes occur during the early phase of healing after implant placement. These changes are dependent on the vertical positions of implants.

Keywords

References

  1. Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Branemark PI. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg 1981;10:387-416. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-9785(81)80077-4
  2. Jemt T, Lekholm U, Grondahl K. 3-year followup study of early single implant restorations ad modum Branemark. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1990;10:340-9.
  3. Cox JF, Zarb GA. The longitudinal clinical efficacy of osseointegrated dental implants: a 3-year report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1987;2:91-100.
  4. Albrektsson T, Isidor F. Consensus report of session V. In: Lang NP, Karring T, editors. Proceedings of the 1st European Workshop on Periodontology. London: Quintessence; 1993. p. 365-9.
  5. Hermann JS, Cochran DL, Nummikoski PV, Buser D. Crestal bone changes around titanium implants. A radiographic evaluation of unloaded nonsubmerged and submerged implants in the canine mandible. J Periodontol 1997;68:1117-30. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1997.68.11.1117
  6. Quirynen M, van Steenberghe D. Bacterial colonization of the internal part of two-stage implants. An in vivo study. Clin Oral Implants Res 1993;4:158-61. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1993.040307.x
  7. Persson LG, Lekholm U, Leonhardt A, Dahlen G, Lindhe J. Bacterial colonization on internal surfaces of Branemark system implant components. Clin Oral Implants Res 1996; 7:90-5. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1996.070201.x
  8. Tarnow DP, Cho SC, Wallace SS. The effect of inter-implant distance on the height of inter-implant bone crest. J Periodontol 2000;71:546-9. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2000.71.4.546
  9. Bain CA. Implant installation in the smoking patient. Periodontol 2000 2003;33:185-93. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0906-6713.2003.03315.x
  10. Hermann JS, Buser D, Schenk RK, Schoolfield JD, Cochran DL. Biologic Width around one- and two-piece titanium implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001;12:559-71. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2001.120603.x
  11. Weber HP, Buser D, Donath K, Fiorellini JP, Doppalapudi V, Paquette DW, et al. Comparison of healed tissues adjacent to submerged and non-submerged unloaded titanium dental implants. A histometric study in beagle dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 1996;7:11-9. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1996.070102.x
  12. Lee DW, Choi YS, Park KH, Kim CS, Moon IS. Effect of microthread on the maintenance of marginal bone level: a 3-year prospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2007;18: 465-70. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01302.x
  13. Oh TJ, Yoon J, Misch CE, Wang HL. The causes of early implant bone loss: myth or science? J Periodontol 2002; 73:322-33. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2002.73.3.322
  14. Wilderman MN, Pennel BM, King K, Barron JM. Histogenesis of repair following osseous surgery. J Periodontol 1970;41:551-65. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1970.41.10.551
  15. Jung YC, Han CH, Lee KW. A 1-year radiographic evaluation of marginal bone around dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:811-8.
  16. Engquist B, Astrand P, Dahlgren S, Engquist E, Feldmann H, Grondahl K. Marginal bone reaction to oral implants: a prospective comparative study of Astra Tech and Branemark System implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13:30-7. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130103.x
  17. Berglundh T, Lindhe J. Dimension of the periimplant mucosa. Biological width revisited. J Clin Periodontol 1996;23: 971-3. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.1996.tb00520.x
  18. Berglundh T, Lindhe J, Ericsson I, Marinello CP, Liljenberg B, Thomsen P. The soft tissue barrier at implants and teeth. Clin Oral Implants Res 1991;2:81-90. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1991.020206.x
  19. Abrahamsson I, Berglundh T, Moon IS, Lindhe J. Peri-implant tissues at submerged and non-submerged titanium implants. J Clin Periodontol 1999;26:600-7. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-051X.1999.260907.x
  20. Abrahamsson I, Berglundh T, Wennstrom J, Lindhe J. The peri-implant hard and soft tissues at different implant systems. A comparative study in the dog. Clin Oral Implants Res 1996;7:212-9. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1996.070303.x

Cited by

  1. Histomorphic-Metric Evaluation of an Immediately Loaded Implant Retrieved from Human Mandible after 2 Years vol.24, pp.2, 2010, https://doi.org/10.1177/03946320110240s207
  2. Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Marginal Bone Changes around Platform‐Switching Implants Placed in Crestal or Subcrestal Positions: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial vol.17, pp.suppl2, 2010, https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12248
  3. Marginal bone level changes in association with different vertical implant positions: a 3-year retrospective study vol.47, pp.4, 2010, https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2017.47.4.231
  4. The Relationship Between Marginal Bone Loss Around Dental Implants and the Specific Characteristics of Implant-Prosthetic Treatment vol.31, pp.2, 2010, https://doi.org/10.1515/cipms-2018-0019