• Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons
• /
• v.32 no.6
• /
• pp.575-579
• /
• 2006

Purpose : The purpose of this study was to evaluate peri-implant bone loss and implant success on anterior maxillary alveolar ridges and Compare Class III and Class IV ridges in the aspect of peri-implant bone loss. Material and Methods : 14 patients (aged 21 to 68, 6males and 8females), who lacked maxillary anterior teeth and were installed from January 2000 to April 2003 at Samsung Medical Center, were selected. The type of implant used included 30 $Br\ddot{a}nemark$ implant. They were taken with digital tomographic and conventional intraoral radiographic examinmation, and were treated with implant installaion without bone augmentation. The peri-implant bone resorption was measured at the mesial and distal aspect of implant on the conventional intraoral radiographs. Results : The study classified the anterior maxillary alveolar ridge and measured peri-implant bone resorption from the period of implant installation to the 2nd year after functional loading radiographically. The study revealed no statistically significant difference between two groups, which was classified by its morphology. The average bone resorption on healing period before loading was 0.18mm and 0.18mm, the 1st year of loading period, 0.77 mm and 0.84mm, and on the 2nd year of loading period, 0.07mm and 0.06mm, respectively on both Class III and class IV. Conclusion : In the knife edge form of anterior maxillary residual ridges(Class IV), implant placement without ridge augmentation does not have significant difference with that of Class III alveolar ridge in the concern of Implant success after 2 year functional loading period in the aspect of peri-implant bone resorption radiographically.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.49 no.3
• /
• pp.185-192
• /
• 2019

Purpose: Implant wall thickness and the height of the implant-abutment interface are known as factors that affect the distribution of stress on the marginal bone around the implant. The goal of this study was to evaluate the long-term effects of supracrestal implant placement and implant wall thickness on maintenance of the marginal bone level. Methods: In this retrospective study, 101 patients with a single implant were divided into the following 4 groups according to the thickness of the implant wall and the initial implant placement level immediately after surgery: 0.75 mm wall thickness, epicrestal position; 0.95 mm wall thickness, epicrestal position; 0.75 mm wall thickness, supracrestal position; 0.95 mm wall thickness, supracrestal position. The marginal bone level change was assessed 1 day after implant placement, immediately after functional loading, and 1 to 5 years after prosthesis delivery. To compare the marginal bone level change, repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to evaluate the statistical significance of differences within groups and between groups over time. Pearson correlation coefficients were also calculated to analyze the correlation between implant placement level and bone loss. Results: Statistically significant differences in bone loss among the 4 groups (P<0.01) and within each group over time (P<0.01) were observed. There was no significant difference between the groups with a wall thickness of 0.75 mm and 0.95 mm. In a multiple comparison, the groups with a supracrestal placement level showed greater bone loss than the epicrestal placement groups. In addition, a significant correlation between implant placement level and marginal bone loss was observed. Conclusions: The degree of bone resorption was significantly higher for implants with a supracrestal placement compared to those with an epicrestal placement.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.52 no.6
• /
• pp.496-508
• /
• 2022

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the long-term survival rate and peri-implant marginal bone loss between different types of dental implant-abutment connections. Methods: Implants with external or internal abutment connections, which were fitted at Gangneung-Wonju National University Dental Hospital from November 2011 to December 2015 and followed up for >5 years, were retrospectively investigated. Cumulative survival rates were evaluated for >5 years, and peri-implant marginal bone loss was evaluated at 1- and 5-year follow-up examinations after functional loading. Results: The 8-year cumulative survival rates were 93.3% and 90.7% in the external and internal connection types, respectively (P=0.353). The mean values of marginal bone loss were 1.23 mm (external) and 0.72 mm (internal) (P<0.001) after 1 year of loading, and 1.20 mm and 1.00 mm for external and internal abutment connections, respectively (P=0.137) after 5 years. Implant length (longer, P=0.018), smoking status (heavy, P=0.001), and prosthetic type (bridge, P=0.004) were associated with significantly greater marginal bone loss, and the use of screw-cement-retained prosthesis was significantly associated (P=0.027) with less marginal bone loss. Conclusions: There was no significant difference in the cumulative survival rate between implants with external and internal abutment connections. After 1 year of loading, marginal bone loss was greater around the implants with an external abutment connection. However, no significant difference between the external and internal connection groups was found after 5 years. Both types of abutment connections are viable treatment options for the reconstruction of partially edentulous ridges.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.34 no.2
• /
• pp.303-315
• /
• 2004

The success and failure of dental implants depends on various factors such as patient's systemic status, quantity and quality of surrounding bone, presence or absence of marginal infection and mechanical loading condition. The measurement of crestal bone changes around the implants is implemental to evaluate the success and long-term prognosis of the implant. This study was to evaluate the cumulative survival rate of the implants which had been placed in the Department of Periodontics, Chonnam National University Hospital between 1992 and 2003, and to observe the crestal bone loss around the implants which had at least 2 consecutive periapical radiographs after connecting the transmucosal abutment. The radiographs were scanned and digitalized, and the crestal bone levels on the mesial and distal surface of implants were measured using Image analyzer (Image Pro Plus, Media Cybernetics, USA), immediately after implant placement, at 2nd surgery, and 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and every year thereafter. Any bone loss was not observed during the period between the 1stand 2nd surgery, and the bone loss was 0.86 ${\pm}$ 0.92 mm for the first year of loading after connecting the transmucosal abutment. After 1 year of loading, annual bone loss was 0.1 ${\pm}$ 0.27 mm, and total bone loss was 0.90 ${\pm}$ 0.80 mm (during the average follow-up periods of 22.5 ${\pm}$ 25.6 Mos), The implant, with smooth surface, in the mandible, and with the fixed bridge prosthesis showed greater bone loss, compared to those, with the rough surface, in the maxilla and with single crown. In systemically diseased patients (including DM or osteoporosis), the greater bone loss was observed. The cumulative survival rate among 432 implants was 94.10% for 7 years. Among 15 failed implants, 9 implants were removed due to mobility from disintegration of bone-implant interface. From this results, crestal bone loss around the implants were greatest during 1 year after transmucosal abutment connection, and various factors could affect peri-implant bone loss. To prevent and predict the bone loss around the implants and improve the prognosis, further comprehensive maintenance and follow-up schedules are required.

• Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons
• /
• v.35 no.4
• /
• pp.240-247
• /
• 2009

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate marginal bone loss to the bone crest functionally loaded for up to eighteen months and also with regard to other variables of interest. Material and Methods: 135 endosseous implants(GS II, Osstem, South Korea) were placed in 35 patients. The design of GS II implant is straight with the microthread. Radiographic examinations were conducted at baseline (implant loading) and 3, 6, 9, 12 and 18 months after loading. Marginal bone level measurement was made from the reference point to the lowest observed point of contact of the marginal bone with the fixture. The reference point of the fixture was the border between the blasted surface and machined surface of the fixture. Results: Implants were on function for a mean 12.7 months(range, 3?18 months). For the 56 maxillary and 79 mandibular implants, mean marginal bone loss was 0.68 mm and 0.70 mm. Implants placed maxillary posterior area displayed more crestal bone loss than the other position. The difference between mesial and distal bone levels was statistically significant (p<0.05) with respective means of 0.51 mm and 0.62 mm. Also, The difference between bone graft group and no-bone graft group was statistically significant(p<0.05) with respective means of 0.38 mm and 0.66 mm. But no statistically significant influence of sex, type of surgery(one or two stage surgery), the implant length was observed(p>0.05). Conclusion: This study indicates the amount of marginal bone loss around implant has maintained a relative stable during follow-up periods.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.44 no.1
• /
• pp.39-47
• /
• 2014

Purpose: Peri-implantitis, a clinical term describing the inflammatory process that affects the soft and hard tissues around an osseointegrated implant, may lead to peri-implant pocket formation and loss of supporting bone. However, this imprecise definition has resulted in a wide variation of the reported prevalence; ${\geq}10%$ of implants and 20% of patients over a 5- to 10-year period after implantation has been reported. The individual reporting of bone loss, bleeding on probing, pocket probing depth and inconsistent recording of results has led to this variation in the prevalence. Thus, a specific definition of peri-implantitis is needed. This paper describes the vast variation existing in the definition of peri-implantitis and suggests a logical way to record the degree and prevalence of the condition. The evaluation of bone loss must be made within the concept of natural physiological bony remodelling according to the initial peri-implant hard and soft tissue damage and actual definitive load of the implant. Therefore, the reason for bone loss must be determined as either a result of the individual osseous remodelling process or a response to infection. Methods: The most current Papers and Consensus of Opinion describing peri-implantitis are presented to illustrate the dilemma that periodontologists and implant surgeons are faced with when diagnosing the degree of the disease process and the necessary treatment regime that will be required. Results: The treatment of peri-implantitis should be determined by its severity. A case of advanced peri-implantitis is at risk of extreme implant exposure that results in a loss of soft tissue morphology and keratinized gingival tissue. Conclusions: Loss of bone at the implant surface may lead to loss of bone at any adjacent natural teeth or implants. Thus, if early detection of peri-implantitis has not occurred and the disease process progresses to advanced peri-implantitis, the compromised hard and soft tissues will require extensive, skill-sensitive regenerative procedures, including implantotomy, established periodontal regenerative techniques and alternative osteotomy sites.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.47 no.4
• /
• pp.231-239
• /
• 2017

Purpose: To retrospectively evaluate the relationship between the vertical position of the implant-abutment interface and marginal bone loss over 3 years using radiological analysis. Methods: In total, 286 implant surfaces of 143 implants from 61 patients were analyzed. Panoramic radiographic images were taken immediately after implant installation and at 6, 12, and 36 months after loading. The implants were classified into 3 groups based on the vertical position of the implant-abutment interface: group A (above bone level), group B (at bone level), and group C (below bone level). The radiographs were analyzed by a single examiner. Results: Changes in marginal bone levels of $0.99{\pm}1.45$, $1.13{\pm}0.91$, and $1.76{\pm}0.78mm$ were observed at 36 months after loading in groups A, B, and C, respectively, and bone loss was significantly greater in group C than in groups A and B. Conclusions: The vertical position of the implant-abutment interface may affect marginal bone level change. Marginal bone loss was significantly greater in cases where the implantabutment interface was positioned below the marginal bone. Further long-term study is required to validate our results.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.36 no.6
• /
• pp.806-815
• /
• 1998

Regular radiographic examination has been considered as an essential diagnostic method for the osseointegrated dental implantation. This study investigated the marginal bone loss through the measurement on the periapical radiograph around 46 endosseous dental implants. Marginal bone loss have been observed for 5 years after delivery of prostheses. The results were as follows : 1. According to the experimental periods, average marginal bone loss in total implant was 1.821mm in the first year, 1.833mm in the second, 1.892mm at third, 1.910mm at forth and 1.957mm at fifth after delivery of prostheses(P<0.05). 2. The average bone loss was 1.832mm in the maxillae and 1.819mm in the mandible in three years but there was no significant difference between the upper and lower jaw(P>0.05). 3. The average bone loss was 1.824mm in males and 1.818mm in females in five years but there was no significant difference according to the sex(P>0.05). These results indicate that the most of the alveolar bone loss occur within the first year after delivery of dental prostheses resulting in the exposure of polished neck positions, and the bone level stabilizes at first thread portion of the implant fixtures.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.8 no.4
• /
• pp.313-320
• /
• 2016

PURPOSE. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical findings and patient satisfaction on implant overdenture designed with Locator implant attachment or Locator bar attachment in mandibular edentulous patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Implant survival rate, marginal bone loss, probing depth, peri-implant inflammation, bleeding, plaque, calculus, complications, and satisfaction were evaluated on sixteen patients who were treated with mandibular overdenture and have used it for at least 1 year (Locator implant attachment: n=8, Locator bar attachment: n=8). RESULTS. Marginal bone loss, probing depth, plaque index of the Locator bar attachment group were significantly lower than the Locator implant attachment group (P<.05). There was no significant difference on bleeding, peri-implant inflammation, and patient satisfaction between the two denture types (P>.05). The replacement of the attachment components was the most common complication in both groups. Although there was no correlation between marginal bone loss and plaque index, a significant correlation was found between marginal bone loss and probing depth. CONCLUSION. The Locator bar attachment group indicates lesser marginal bone loss and need for maintenance, as compared with the Locator implant attachment group. This may be due to the splinting effect among implants rather than the types of Locator attachment.

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.52 no.7
• /
• pp.408-415
• /
• 2014

Peri-implant diseases are inflammatory lesions, which include peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. Peri-implant mucositis is described as the presence of inflammation in the mucosa around implants without any bone loss. By contrast, in peri-implantitis, besides the inflammation in the peri-implant mucosa, loss of supporting bone is also seen. Diagnosis of peri-implant diseases require the use of gentle probing(0.2 ~ 0.3N) to identify the presence of bleeding on probing, probing depth and suppuration, both signs of clinical inflammation. Radiographs are required to detect loss of supporting bone. Baseline probing measurements and high quality, long cone periapical radiographs should be obtained once the restoration of the implant is completed to make possible longitudinal monitoring of peri-implant tissue.