The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

  • 제10권2호
  • /
  • Pages.85-92
  • /
  • 2018
  • /
  • 2005-7806(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2005-7814(eISSN)
대한치과보철학회 (The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Hydroxyapatite-coated implant: Clinical prognosis assessment via a retrospective follow-up study for the average of 3 years

  • Jung, Jun-Hong (School of Dentistry, The Graduate School, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kim, Sang-Yun (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Section of Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Yi, Yang-Jin (Department of Dentistry & Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Lee, Bu-Kyu (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Asan Medical Center, College of Medicine, Ulsan University) ;
  • Kim, Young-Kyun (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Section of Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital)
  • 투고 : 2017.05.07
  • 심사 : 2017.12.05
  • 발행 : 2018.04.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

PURPOSE. This research evaluated clinical outcomes of two types of hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated implants: OT (Osstem TS III-HA, Osstem implant Co., Busan, Korea) and ZM (Zimmer TSV-HA, Zimmer dental, Carlsbad, USA). MATERIALS AND METHODS. The research was conducted on 303 implants (89 of OT, 214 of ZM), which were placed from January 16, 2010 to December 20, 2012. The prognosis was evaluated in terms of success rates, survival rates, annual marginal bone loss, and implant stability quotients (ISQ). The samples were classified into immediate, early, conventional, and delayed groups according to the loading time. RESULTS. Overall, there were no significant differences between OT and ZM in success rates, survival rates, and annual marginal bone loss, except for the result of secondary stability. OT showed $77.83{\pm}8.23ISQ$, which was marginally higher than $76.09{\pm}6.90ISQ$ of ZM (P<.05). In terms of healing periods, only immediate loading showed statistically significant differences (P<.05). Differences between OT and ZM were observed in terms of two indices, the annual marginal bone loss ($0.17{\pm}0.58mm/year$ < $0.45{\pm}0.80mm/year$) and secondary stability ($84.36{\pm}3.80ISQ$ > $82.48{\pm}3.69ISQ$) (P<.05). OT and ZM did not have any statistically significant differences in early, conventional, and delayed loading (P>.05). CONCLUSION. OT (97.75%) and ZM (98.50%) showed relatively good outcomes in terms of survival rates. In general, OT and ZM did not show statistically significant differences in most indices (P>.05), although OT performed marginally better than ZM in the immediate loading and 1-stage surgery (P<.05).

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. de Groot K, Geesink R, Klein CP, Serekian P. Plasma sprayed coatings of hydroxylapatite. J Biomed Mater Res 1987;21:1375-81. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820211203
  3. Szmukler-Moncler S, Piattelli A, Favero GA, Dubruille JH. Considerations preliminary to the application of early and immediate loading protocols in dental implantology. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000;11:12-25. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.011001012.x
  4. Gapski R, Wang HL, Mascarenhas P, Lang NP. Critical review of immediate implant loading. Clin Oral Implants Res 2003;14:515-27. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2003.00950.x
  5. Whitehead RY, Lucas LC, Lacefield WR. The effect of dissolution on plasma sprayed hydroxylapatite coatings on titanium. Clin Mater 1993;12:31-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0267-6605(93)90025-3
  6. Wheeler SL. Eight-year clinical retrospective study of titanium plasma-sprayed and hydroxyapatite-coated cylinder implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:340-50.
  7. Zablotsky MH. Hydroxyapatite coatings in implant dentistry. Implant Dent 1992;1:253-7. https://doi.org/10.1097/00008505-199200140-00004
  8. Overgaard S, Soballe K, Josephsen K,. Hansen ES, Bunger C. Role of different loading conditions on resorption of hydroxyapatite coating evaluated by histomorphometric and stereological methods. J Orthop Res 1996;14:888-94. https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.1100140607
  9. Yoshinari M, Ozeki K, Sumii T. Properties of hydroxyapatitecoated Ti-6Al-4V alloy produced by the ion-plating method. Bull Tokyo Dent Coll 1991;32:147-56.
  10. Sugiyama T, Miake Y, Yajima Y, Yamamoto K, Sakurai K. Surface observation of thin hydroxyapatite-coated implants at 80 months after insertion. J Oral Implantol 2011;37:273-8. https://doi.org/10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-09-00113.1
  11. Lee JJ, Rouhfar L, Beirne OR. Survival of hydroxyapatitecoated implants: a meta-analytic review. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2000;58:1372-9. https://doi.org/10.1053/joms.2000.18269
  12. Kim SS, Lee JH, Yu SH, Lee HJ, Moon JW, Park IS, Sohn DS. Comparative study of removal torque of 3 different hydroxyapatite coated implants in the femur of rabbits. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 2011;37:49-53. https://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2011.37.1.49
  13. Eom TG, Kim JH, Cho IH, Jeong CM, Cho YS, Kim YK. Experimental study about the bony healing of hydroxyapatite coating implants. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 2011;37:295-300. https://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2011.37.4.295
  14. Aparicio C, Rangert B, Sennerby L. Immediate/early loading of dental implants: a report from the Sociedad Espanola de Implantes World Congress consensus meeting in Barcelona, Spain, 2002. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2003;5:57-60.
  15. Albrektsson T, Zarb G, Worthington P, Eriksson AR. The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1986;1:11-25.
  16. Naert I, Koutsikakis G, Duyck J, Quirynen M, Jacobs R, van Steenberghe D. Biologic outcome of implant-supported restorations in the treatment of partial edentulism. part I: a longitudinal clinical evaluation. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13:381-9. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130406.x
  17. O'Roark WL. Survival rate of dental implants: an individual practitioner's anecdotal review of 25 years of experience. J Oral Implantol 1997;23:90-103.
  18. Guttenberg SA. Longitudinal report on hydroxyapatite-coated implants and advanced surgical techniques in a private practice. Compend 1993:S549-53.
  19. Saadoun AP, Le Gall MG. An 8-year compilation of clinical results obtained with Steri-Oss endosseous implants. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1996;17:669-74, 676.
  20. Jones JD, Lupori J, Van Sickels JE, Gardner W. A 5-year com-parison of hydroxyapatite-coated titanium plasma-sprayed and titanium plasma-sprayed cylinder dental implants. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1999;87:649-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1079-2104(99)70154-X
  21. Kim YK, Ahn KJ, Yun PY, Kim M, Yang HS, Yi YJ, Bae JH. Effect of loading time on marginal bone loss around hydroxyapatite-coated implants. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 2013;39:161-7. https://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2013.39.4.161
  22. Kim YK, Lee JH, Lee JY, Yi YJ. A randomized controlled clinical trial of two types of tapered implants on immediate loading in the posterior maxilla and mandible. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2012;28:1602-11.
  23. Polizzi G, Grunder U, Goene R, Hatano N, Henry P, Jackson WJ, Kawamura K, Renouard F, Rosenberg R, Triplett G, Werbitt M, Lithner B. Immediate and delayed implant placement into extraction sockets: a 5-year report. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2000;2:93-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2000.tb00111.x
  24. Morris HF, Ochi S. Hydroxyapatite-coated implants: a case for their use. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1998;56:1303-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-2391(98)90615-2

피인용 문헌

  1. Sandblasted and Acid Etched Titanium Dental Implant Surfaces Systematic Review and Confocal Microscopy Evaluation vol.12, pp.11, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3390/ma12111763
  2. Meso‐macroporous crack‐free nanohydroxyapatite coatings templated by C12E10 diblock copolymer on Ti6Al4V implant materials toward human osteoblast‐like cells vol.108, pp.4, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.36866
  3. Titanium Alloys for Dental Implants: A Review vol.2, pp.2, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3390/prosthesis2020011
  4. Micro-Nano Surface Characterization and Bioactivity of a Calcium Phosphate-Incorporated Titanium Implant Surface vol.12, pp.1, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/jfb12010003
  5. Improved Mechanical Properties of Ultra-High Shear Force Mixed Reduced Graphene Oxide/Hydroxyapatite Nanocomposite Produced Using Spark Plasma Sintering vol.11, pp.4, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3390/nano11040986
  6. Polyphenols from Grape Pomace: Functionalization of Chitosan-Coated Hydroxyapatite for Modulated Swelling and Release of Polyphenols vol.37, pp.51, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.1c01930