Browse > Article

Clinical and radiographic evaluation of $Neoplan^{(R)}$ implant with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface and external connection  

An, Hee-Suk (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University)
Moon, Hong-Suk (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University)
Shim, Jun-Sung (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University)
Cho, Kyu-Sung (Department of Periodontics, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University)
Lee, Keun-Woo (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University)
Publication Information
The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics / v.46, no.2, 2008 , pp. 125-136 More about this Journal
Abstract
Statement of problem: Since the concept of osseointegration in dental implants was introduced by $Br{{\aa}}nemark$ et al, high long-term success rates have been achieved. Though the use of dental implants have increased dramatically, there are few studies on domestic implants with clinical and objective long-term data. Purpose: The aim of this retrospective study was to provide long-term data on the $Neoplan^{(R)}$ implant, which features a sandblasted and acid-etched surface and external connection. Material and methods: 96 $Neoplan^{(R)}$ implants placed in 25 patients in Yonsei University Hospital were examined to determine the effect of the factors on marginal bone loss, through clinical and radiographic results during 18 to 57 month period. Results: 1. Out of a total of 96 implants placed in 25 patients, two fixtures were lost, resulting in 97.9% of cumulative survival rate. 2. Throughout the study period, the survival rates were 96.8% in the maxilla and 98.5% in the mandible. The survival rates were 97.6% in the posterior regions and 100% in the anterior regions. 3. The mean bone loss for the first year after prosthesis placement and the mean annual bone loss after the first year for men were significantly higher than that of women (P<0.05). 4. The group of partial edentulism with no posterior teeth distal to the implant prosthesis showed significantly more bone loss compared to the group of partial edentulism with presence of posterior teeth distal to the implant prosthesis in terms of mean bone loss for the first year and after the first year (P<0.05). 5. The mean annual bone loss after the first year was more pronounced in posterior regions compared to anterior regions (P<0.05). 6. No significant difference in marginal bone loss was found in the following factors: jaws, type of prostheses, type of opposing dentition, and submerged /non-submerged implants (P<0.05). Conclusion: On the basis of these results, the factors influencing marginal bone loss were gender, type of edentulism, and location in the arch, while the factors such as arch, type of prostheses, type of opposing dentition, submerged / non- submerged implants had no significant effect on bone loss. In the present study, the cumulative survival rate of the $Neoplan^{(R)}$ implant with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface was 97.9% up to a maximum 57-month period. Further long-term investigations for this type of implant system and evaluation of other various domestic implant systems are needed in future studies.
Keywords
$Neoplan^{(R)}$; SLA surface; External connection; Survival rate; Marginal bone loss;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Branemark PI, Hansson BO, Adell R, Breine U, Lindstrom J, Hallen O, Ohman A. Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10-year period. Scand J Plast Reconstr Sur 1977;16:1-132
2 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   DOI
3 Albrektsson T, Dahl E, Enbom L, Engevall S, Enquist B, Eriksson AR, Feldmann G, Freiberg N, Glantz PO, Kjellman O, Kristersson L, Kvint S, Kondell PA, Palmquist J, Werndahl L, Astrand P. Osseointegrated oral implants - a Swedish multicenter study 8139 consecutively inserted Nobelpharma implant. J Periodontol 1988;59:287-96   DOI   PUBMED
4 Buser D, Nydegger T, Oxland T, Cochran DL, Schenk RK, Hirt HP, Snetivy D, Nolte LP. Interface shear of titanium implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface: a biomechanical study in the maxilla of miniature pigs. J Biomed Mater Res 1999;45:75-83   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Cochran DL. A comparison of endosseous dental implant surfaces. J Periodontol 1999;70:1523-39   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Testori T, Wiseman L, Woolfe S, Porter SS. A prospective multicenter clinical study of the Osseotite implant: Fouryear interim reports. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001;16:193-200   PUBMED
7 Quirynen M, Naert D, van Steenberghe. Fixture design and overload influence marginal bone loss and fixture success in the Branemark system. Clin Oral Implants Res 1992;3:104-11   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Becker W, Becker B, Ricci A, Bahat O, Rosenberg E, Rose LF, Handelsman M, Israelson H. A prospective multicenter clinical trial comparing one- and two-stage titanium screwshaped fixtures with one-stage plasma-sprayed solid-screw fixtures. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2000;2:159-65   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Jaffin R, Berman C. The excessive loss of Branemark fixture in type IV bone: a 5-year analysis. J Periodontol 1991;62:2-4   DOI   PUBMED
10 Friberg B, Jemt T, Lekholm U. Early failures in 4,641 consecutively placed Branemark dental implants: a study from stage 1 surgery to the connection of completed prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991;6:142-6   PUBMED
11 Seo JY, Shim JS, Lee JH, Lee KW. Clinical and radiographical evaluation of implant-supported fixed partial prostheses. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2006;44:394-404   과학기술학회마을
12 Isidor F. Loss of osseointegration caused by occlusal load of oral implants. A clinical and radiographic study in monkeys. Clin Oral Impl Res 1996;7:143-52   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Rocci A, Martignoni M, Gottlow J. Immediate loading of Branemark $system^{\circledR}\;TiUnite^{TM}$ and machined-surface implants in the posterior mandible: a randomized open-ended clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2003;5s:57-63
14 August M, Chung K, Chang Y, Glowacki J. Influence of estrogen status on endosseous implant osseointegration. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2001;59:1285-9   DOI   ScienceOn
15 Lekholm U, Grondahl K, Jemt T. Outcome of oral implant treatment in partially edentulous jaws followed 20 years in clinical function. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2006;8:178-86   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Cochran DL, Buser D, ten Brugenakte CM, Weingart D, Taylor TM, Bernard JP, Peters F, Simpson JP. The use of reduced healing times on $ITI^{\circledR}$ implants with a sandblasted and etched (SLA) surface: Early results from clinical trials on $ITI^{\circledR}$ SLA implants. Clinical Oral Implants Research 2002;13:144-53   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Becker W, Becker BE, Alsuwyed A, Al-Mubarak S. Longterm evaluation of 282 implants in maxillary and mandibular molar positions: a prospective study. J Periodontol 1999;70:896-901   DOI
18 Wyatt CCL, Zarb GA. Bone level changes proximal to oral implants supporting fixed partial prostheses. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13:162-8   DOI   ScienceOn
19 Lekholm U, Zarb GA. Patient selection and preparation. In: Branemark PI, Zarb GA, Albrektsson T. Tissue integrated prostheses: osseointegration in clinical dentistry. Chicago: Quintessence. 1985;199-209
20 Esposito M, Thomsen P, Ericson LE, Lekholm U. Histopathologic observations on early implant failure. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:789-810
21 Bornstein MM, Schmid B, Belser UC, Lussi A, Buser D. Early loading of non-submerged titanium implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface: 5-year results of a prospective study in partially edentulous patients. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005;16:631-8   DOI   ScienceOn
22 Naert I, Koutsikakis G, Quirynen M, Duyck J, van Steenberghe D, Jacobs R. Biologic outcome of implantsupported restorations in the treatment of partial edentulism. Part 2: a longitudinal radiographic evaluation. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13:390-5   DOI   ScienceOn
23 Becker W, Becker BE, Israelson H, Lucchini JP, Handelsman M, Ammons W, Rosenberg E, Rose L, Tucker LM, Lekholm U. One-step surgical placement of Branemark implants: a prospective multicenter clinical study. Int J Oral Maxillo fac Implants 1997;12:454-62
24 Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T, Andersson B, Krol JJ. A histomorphometric and removal torque study of screwshaped titanium implants with three different surface topographies. Clin Oral Implants Res 1995;6:24-30   DOI   ScienceOn
25 Lang NP, Mombelli A, Tonetti MS, Bragger U, Hammerle CHF. Clinical trials on therapies for peri-implant infections. Ann Periodontol 1997;2:343-56   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
26 Moy PK, Medina D, Shetty V, Aghaloo TL. Dental implant failure rates and associated risk factors. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2005;20:569-77
27 Porras R, Anderson GB, Caffese R, Narendran S, Trejo PM. Clinical response to 2 different therapeutic regimens to treat peri-implant mucositis. Journal of Periodontology 2002;73:1118-25   DOI   ScienceOn
28 Albrektsson T, Wennerberg A. Oral implant surfaces: Part 2 - Review focusing on clinical knowledge of different surfaces. Int J Prosthodont 2004;17:544-64   PUBMED
29 Mombelli A, van Oosten MAC, Schurch E, Lang NP. The microbiota associated with successful or failing osseointegrated titanium implants. Oral Microbiol Immunol 1987;2:145-51   DOI   ScienceOn
30 Bryant SR, Zarb GA. Crestal bone loss proximal to oral implants in older and younger adults. J Prosthet Dent 2003;89:589-97   DOI   ScienceOn
31 Buser D, Mericske-Stern R, Bernard JP, Behneke A, Behneke N, Hirt HP, Belser UC, Lang NP. Long-term evaluation of non-submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multi-center study with 2359 implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 1997;8:161-72   DOI   ScienceOn