구강회복응용과학지 (Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science)

  • 제31권1호
  • /
  • Pages.33-44
  • /
  • 2015
  • /
  • 2384-4353(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2384-4272(eISSN)
대한턱관절교합학회 (Korean Academy of Stomatognathic Function and Occlusion)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

디지털 공제술을 이용한 platform switching 임플란트의 변연골 소실에 대한 연구

Evaluation of marginal bone loss around platform-switched implants by digital subtraction radiography

  • 김치윤 (원광대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실) ;
  • 김성숙 (원광대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실) ;
  • 인희선 (원광대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실) ;
  • 김유리 (원광대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실)
  • Kim, Chi-Yoon (Department of Dentistry, Graduate School, Wonkwang University) ;
  • Kim, Sung-Sook (Department of Dentistry, Graduate School, Wonkwang University) ;
  • In, Hee-Sun (Department of Dentistry, Graduate School, Wonkwang University) ;
  • Kim, Yu-Lee (Department of Dentistry, Graduate School, Wonkwang University)
  • 투고 : 2014.12.16
  • 심사 : 2015.03.02
  • 발행 : 2015.03.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

목적: 본 연구는 platform matching, platform switching을 시행한 임플란트의 변연골 소실을 비교하여 platform switching 개념의 임상적 의의를 평가하고자 한다. 연구 재료 및 방법: 원광대학교 치과병원 임플란트 센터에서 치료를 진행한 환자를 대상으로 임플란트 식립 시기, 직경, 길이, 지대주 연결방법 및 보철물 연결고정 유무를 조사하였다. 변연골 소실량을 측정하기 위해서 Emago advanced v5.6 프로그램을 사용하여 임플란트 식립 시와 가장 최근 내원 시의 치근단 방사선 사진을 비교하였다. 결과: 환자 82명의 임플란트 150개를 대상으로 6 - 63개월 동안 관찰한 결과 platform matching 임플란트는 $1.16{\pm}0.54mm$, platform switching 임플란트는 $0.68{\pm}0.27mm$의 변연골 소실을 나타내었다. 결론: Platform switching을 시행함으로써 임플란트의 변연골 소실을 줄이는 효과가 있는 것으로 사료된다.

Purpose: This study is to evaluate the clinical significance of the platform switching concept by comparing the marginal bone loss around platform-matched and platform-switched implants. Materials and Methods: Date of implant placement, diameter, length, implant-abutment connection type and absence of splinting prosthesis were investigated on patients who performed treatment with implant placement at Wonkwang University Dental Hospital Implant Center. To measure the marginal bone loss around implants, periapical radiographs of patient were used when implant was placed and when visited the center most recently by using the program, Emago advanced v5.6. Results: As a result of observing on 150 implants of 82 patients for 6 - 63 months, platform-matched implants showed $1.16{\pm}0.54mm$, platform-switched implants showed $0.68{\pm}0.27mm$ of marginal bone loss. Conclusion: It was considered that there is the positive effect to reduce marginal bone loss around platform-switched implants.

키워드

참고문헌

  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. Smith DE, Zarb GA. Criteria for success of osseointegrated endosseous implants. J Prosthet Dent 1989;62:567-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(89)90081-4
  3. Albrektsson T, Zarb G, Worthington P, Eriksson AR. The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria for success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1986;1:11-25.
  4. Oh TJ, Yoon J, Misch CE, Wang HL. The causes of early implant bone loss: myth of science? J Periodontol 2002;73:322-33. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2002.73.3.322
  5. Hermann JS, Cochran DL, Nummikoski PV, Buser D. Crestal bone changes around titatium 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. Lazzara RJ, Porter SS. Platform switching: a new concept in implant dentistry for controlling postrestorative crestal bone levels. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2006;26:9-17.
  7. Bragger U, Burgin W, Lang NP, Buser D. Digital subtraction radiography for the assessment of changes in peri-implant bone density. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991;6:160-6.
  8. Han WJ. A comparison of subtracted images from dental subtraction programs. Korean J Oral Maxillofac Radiol 2002;32:147-51.
  9. Pilliar RM, Deporter DA, Watson PA, Valiquette N. Dental implant design-effect on bone remodeling. J Biomed Mater Res 1991;25:467-83. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820250405
  10. Ericsson I, Persson LG, Berglundh T, Marinello CP, Lindhe J, Klinge B. Different types of inflammatory reactions in peri-implant soft tissues. J Clin Periodontol 1995;22:255-61.
  11. Cappiello M, Luongo R, Di Iorio D, Bugea C, Cocchetto R, Celletti R. Evaluation of peri-implant bone loss around platform-switched implants. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2008;28:347-55.
  12. de Almeida FD, Carvalho AC, Fontes M, Pedrosa A, Costa R, Noleto JW, Mourao CF. Radiographic evaluation of marginal bone level around internalhex implants with switched platform: a clinical case report series. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2011;26:587-92.
  13. Enkling N, Johren P, Klimberg V, Bayer S, Mericske- Stern R, Jepsen S. Effect of platform switching on peri-implant bone levels: a randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 2011;22:1185-92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02090.x
  14. Himmlova L, Dostalova T, Kacovsky A, Konvickova S. Influence of implant length and diameter on stress distribution: a finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2004;91:20-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2003.08.008
  15. Lee JH, Cho HW. Photoelastic stress analysis of single implant restoration according to implant fixture size and abutment diameter. J Dent Rehabil Appl Sci 2008;24:253-67.
  16. Al-Qutub MN. Radiologic evaluation of the marginal bone loss around dental implants with different neck diameters. Pakistan Oral & Dental Journal 2011;31:150-3.
  17. Pierrisnard L, Renouard F, Renault P, Barquins M. Influence of implant length and bicortical anchorage on implant stress distribution. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2003;5:254-62. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2003.tb00208.x
  18. Myung TS, Jung SH, Kim TY, Kim YL. Clinical study on the survival rate and marginal bone resorption of short implants. J Dent Rehabil Appl Sci 2012;28:1-13.
  19. Gurgel-Juarez NC, de Almeida EO, Rocha EP, Freitas AC Jr, Anchieta RB, de Vargas LC, Kina S, Franca FM. Regular and platform switching: bone stress analysis varying implant type. J Prosthodont 2012;21:160-6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2011.00801.x
  20. Yang TC, Maeda Y. The biomechanical effect of platform switching on external- and internal-connection implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2013;28:143-7. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.2305
  21. Maeda Y, Satoh T, Sogo M. In vitro differences of stress concentrations for internal and external hex implant-abutment connections: a short communication. J Oral Rehabil 2006;33:75-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2006.01545.x
  22. Chun HJ, Shin HS, Han CH, Lee SH. Influence of implant abutment type on stress distribution in bone under various loading conditions using finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006;21:195-202.
  23. Koo KT, Lee EJ, Kim JY, Seol YJ, Han JS, Kim TI, Lee YM, Ku Y, Wikesjo UM, Rhyu IC. The effect of internal versus external abutment connection modes on crestal bone changes around dental implants: a radiographic analysis. J Periodontol 2012;83:1104-9. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2011.110456
  24. Kim YL, Cho HW, JB. Three dimensional finite element analysis of internally connected implant systems. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2006;44:85-102.
  25. Schwarz F, Hegewald A, Becker J. Impact of implant-abutment connection and positioning of the machined collar/microgap on crestal bone level changes: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014;25:417-25.
  26. Schwarz F, Alcoforado G, Nelson K, Schaer A, Taylor T, Beuer F, Strietzel FP. Impact of implantabutment connection, positioning of the machined collar/microgap, and platform switching on crestal bone level changes. Camlog foundation consensus report. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014;25:1301-3. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12269
  27. Yilmaz B, Mess J, Seidt J, Clelland NL. Strain comparisons for splinted and nonsplinted cement-retained implant crowns. Int J Prosthodont 2013;26:235-8. https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.3254
  28. So SS, Noh HS, Kim CS, Choi SH, Chae JK, Kim CK, Cho KS. Evaluation of peri-implant bone density changes in Brånemark implants by computer assisted densitometric image analysis (CADIA). J Korean Acad Periodontol 2007;37:137-50. https://doi.org/10.5051/jkape.2007.37.1.137
  29. Bittar-Cortez JA, Passeri LA, de Almeida SM, Haiter-Neto F. Comparison of peri-implant bone level assessment in digitized conventional radiographs and digital subtraction images. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2006;35:258-62. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/84778143
  30. Hürzeler M, Fickl S, Zuhr O, Wachtel HC. Periimplant bone level around implants with platformswitched abutments: preliminary data from a prospective study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007;65(7 Suppl 1):33-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2007.03.024
  31. Dunn SM, van der Stelt PF, Ponce A, Fenesy K, Shah S. A comparison of two registration techniques for digital subtraction radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1993;22:77-80. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.22.2.8375559

피인용 문헌

  1. Retrospective study on marginal bone loss around maxillary anterior implants with or without bone graft vol.54, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2016.54.2.103