The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effect of implant diameter and cantilever length on the marginal bone height changes and stability of implants supporting screw retained prostheses: A randomized double blinded control trial

  • Received : 2023.01.03
  • Accepted : 2023.04.16
  • Published : 2023.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSE. This randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate the effect of implants' two different diameters and cantilever lengths on the marginal bone loss and stability of mplants supporting maxillary prostheses. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Ninety-six implants were placed in sixteen completely edentulous maxillary ridges. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: Group A, implants were placed with a cantilever to anterior-posterior AP spread length (CL:AP) at a ratio of 1:3; Group B, implants were placed with a CL:AP at a ratio of 1:2. Patients were further divided into four sub-groups: Groups A1, A2, B1, and B2. Groups A1 and B1 received small diameter implants while Groups A2 and B2 received standard diameter implants. Bone height and stability measurements around each implant were performed at 0, 4, 8 and 24 months after definitive prostheses delivery. RESULTS. Statistical analysis of the mean implant stability and height values revealed an insignificant difference between Group A1 and Group A2 at all the different time intervals while significantly higher values in Group B1 in comparison with Group B2. Results also showed significantly higher values in Group A1 in comparison with Group B1 and an insignificant difference between Group A2 and Group B2 at all the different time intervals. CONCLUSION. It can be concluded that the use of small diameter implants placed with a CL:AP at a ratio of 1:3 provided predictable results and that the 1:2 CL:AP significantly induced more critical bone loss in the small diameter implants group, which can significantly reduce long term success and survival of implants

Keywords

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to convey their gratitude and appreciation to the Laboratory Technicians Mr. Diaa Mohamed and Mrs. Kamala Mostafa or their patience, continuous help and support for making this project come to light.

References

  1. Flanagan D. Mini implants supporting fixed partial dentures in the posterior mandible: A retrospective. J Oral Implantol 2015;41:e138-43.  https://doi.org/10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-14-00081
  2. Jackson BJ. Small-diameter implants: a treatment consideration for the maxillary edentulous patient. Dent Today 2013;32:86, 88, 90-2. 
  3. Flanagan D. Fixed partial dentures and crowns supported by very small diameter dental implants in compromised sites. Implant Dent 2008;17:182-91.  https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0b013e31817776cf
  4. Yaltirik M, Gokcen-Rohlig B, Ozer S, Evlioglu G. Clinical evaluation of small diameter Straumann implants in partially edentulous patients: a 5-year retrospective study. J Dent (Tehran) 2011;8:75-80. 
  5. Schiegnitz E, Al-Nawas B, Kammerer PW, Grotz KA. Oral rehabilitation with dental implants in irradiated patients: a meta-analysis on implant survival. Clin Oral Investig 2014;18:687-98.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-013-1134-9
  6. Gonzalez-Valls G, Roca-Millan E, Cespedes-Sanchez JM, Gonzalez-Navarro B, Torrejon-Moya A, LopezLopez J. Narrow diameter dental implants as an alternative treatment for atrophic alveolar ridges. systematic review and meta-analysis. Materials (Basel) 2021;14:3234. 
  7. Al-Nawas B, Domagala P, Fragola G, Freiberger P, Ortiz-Vigon A, Rousseau P, Tondela J. A prospective noninterventional study to evaluate survival and success of reduced diameter implants made from titanium-zirconium alloy. J Oral Implantol 2015;41:e118-25.  https://doi.org/10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-13-00149
  8. Polack MA, Arzadon JM. Titanium-zirconium implants: Case report. Immediate provisional and restoration using a small-diameter system. Dent Today 2012;31:64, 66, 68-9. 
  9. Hasan I, Bourauel C, Mundt T, Stark H, Heinemann F. Biomechanics and load resistance of small-diameter and mini dental implants: a review of literature. Biomed Tech (Berl) 2014;59:1-5.  https://doi.org/10.1515/bmt-2013-0092
  10. Gleiznys A, Skirbutis G, Harb A, Barzdziukaite I, Grinyte I. New approach towards mini dental implants and small-diameter implants: an option for long-term prostheses. Stomatologija 2012;14:39-45. 
  11. Klein MO, Schiegnitz E, Al-Nawas B. Systematic review on success of narrow-diameter dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014;29 Suppl:43-54.  https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.2014suppl.g1.3
  12. Schiegnitz E, Al-Nawas B. Narrow-diameter implants: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 2018;29:Suppl 16:21-40.  https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13272
  13. Misch CE. Principles for screw-retained prostheses In: Misch C, editor. Dental implant prosthetics. St. Louis; Elsevier Mosby; 2005. p. 452-71. 
  14. Malo P, Rangert B, Nobre M. All-on-4 immediate-function concept with Branemark System implants for completely edentulous maxillae: a 1-year retrospective clinical study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2005;7: Suppl 1:S88-94.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2005.tb00080.x
  15. English CE. Critical A-P spread. Implant Soc 1990;1:2-3. 
  16. McAlarney ME, Stavropoulos DN. Determination of cantilever length-anterior-posterior spread ratio assuming failure criteria to be the compromise of the prosthesis retaining screw-prosthesis joint. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:331-9.  https://doi.org/10.1097/00008505-199700610-00039
  17. Karoussis IK, Bragger U, Salvi GE, Burgin W, Lang NP. Effect of implant design on survival and success rates of titanium oral implants: a 10-year prospective cohort study of the ITI Dental Implant System. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004;15:8-17.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.00983.x
  18. Misch CE, Perel ML, Wang HL, Sammartino G, Galindo-Moreno P, Trisi P, Steigmann M, Rebaudi A, Palti A, Pikos MA, Schwartz-Arad D, Choukroun J, Gutierrez-Perez JL, Marenzi G, Valavanis DK. Implant success, survival, and failure: the International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) Pisa Consensus Conference. Implant Dent 2008;17:5-15.  https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0b013e3181676059
  19. Khorshid HE, Sheta NM. The effect of anterior-posterior spread and cantilever length on the supporting structures of maxillary screw retained prosthesis. Egyptian Dent J 2017;63:1955-64.  https://doi.org/10.21608/edj.2017.75174
  20. Misch CE. Maxillary arch implant considerations: fixed and overdenture prostheses, in contemporary implant dentistry. St. Louis; Elsevier Mosby; 2008. p. 367-88. 
  21. Purcell BA, McGlumphy EA, Yilmaz B, Holloway JA, Beck FM. Anteroposterior spread and cantilever length in mandibular metal-resin implant-fixed complete dental prostheses: A 7- to 9-year analysis. Int J Prosthodont 2015;28:512-8.  https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.4172
  22. Drago C. Ratios of cantilever lengths and anterior-posterior spreads of definitive hybrid full-arch, screw-retained prostheses: results of a clinical study. J Prosthodont 2018;27:402-8.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12519
  23. Walter L, Greenstein G. Utility of measuring anterior-posterior spread to determine distal cantilever length off a fixed implant-supported full-arch prosthesis: A review of the literature. J Am Dent Assoc 2020;151:790-5.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adaj.2020.06.016
  24. Lachmann S, Laval JY, Axmann D, Weber H. Influence of implant geometry on primary insertion stability and simulated peri-implant bone loss: an in vitro study using resonance frequency analysis and damping capacity assessment. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2011;26:347-55. 
  25. Turkyilmaz I, Sennerby L, McGlumphy EA, Tozum TF. Biomechanical aspects of primary implant stability: a human cadaver study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2009;11:113-9.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2008.00097.x
  26. Merheb J, Coucke W, Jacobs R, Naert I, Quirynen M. Influence of bony defects on implant stability. Clin Oral Impl Res 2010;21:919-23.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01932.x
  27. Su YH, Peng BY, Wang PD, Feng SW. Evaluation of the implant stability and the marginal bone level changes during the first three months of dental implant healing process: A prospective clinical study. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2020;110:103899. 
  28. Gedrange T, Hietschold V, Mai R, Wolf P, Nicklisch M, Harzer W. An evaluation of resonance frequency analysis for the determination of the primary stability of orthodontic palatal implants. A study in human cadavers. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005;16:425-31.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01134.x
  29. Brouwers JEIG, Buis S, de Groot PG, de Laat B, Remijn JA. Resonance frequency analysis with two different devices after conventional implant placement with ridge preservation: A prospective pilot cohort study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2021;23:789-99.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.13031
  30. Friberg B, Sennerby L, Linden B, Grondahl K, Lekholm U. Stability measurements of one-stage Branemark implants during healing in mandibles. A clinical resonance frequency analysis study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1999;28:266-72.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0901-5027(99)80156-8
  31. Supachaiyakit P, Serichetaphongse P, Chengprapakorn W. The influence of implant design on implant stability in low-density bone under guided surgical template in inexperienced surgeons: A pilot randomized controlled clinical trial using resonance frequency analysis. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2022;24:444-54.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.13100
  32. Misch CE. Stress factors: influence on treatment planning. In: Misch CE, ed. Dental implant prosthetics. St. Louis, Mo: CV Mosby; 2005. p. 71-90. 
  33. Rodriguez AM, Aquilino SA, Lund PS. Cantilever and implant biomechanics: a review of the literature, Part 2. J Prosthodont 1994;3:114-8.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.1994.tb00138.x
  34. Aglietta M, Siciliano VI, Zwahlen M, Bragger U, Pjetursson BE, Lang NP, Salvi GE. A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of implant supported fixed dental prostheses with cantilever extensions after an observation period of at least 5 years. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20:441-51.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01706.x
  35. Rangert B, Krogh PH, Langer B, Van Roekel N. Bending overload and implant fracture: a retrospective clinical analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995;10:326-34. 
  36. Frost HM. A 2003 update of bone physiology and Wolff's Law for clinicians. Angle Orthod 2004;74:3-15. 
  37. Misch CE. Progressive bone loading: In: Misch CE, ed. Dental implant prosthetics. St. Louis; Elsevier Mosby; 2005. p. 511-30.