• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.10 no.3
• /
• pp.191-196
• /
• 2018

PURPOSE. The goal of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcome of single short implants, less than 8 mm in length, placed in the posterior area. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A total of 128 patients (75 male and 53 female, mean age: $52.6{\pm}11.2years$) with 154 implants participated. Implant marginal bone loss, and survival and success rates were measured. RESULTS. The mean follow-up period was $51.35{\pm}24.97months$. A total of 128 implants, 8 mm in length, were placed in patients who had mean marginal bone loss of 0.75 mm. These implants had a survival rate of 95.3%. Twenty-six implants, 7 mm in length, were placed in areas with a mean marginal bone loss of 0.78 mm and had a survival rate of 96.2%. Both marginal bone loss and survival rate were not statistically different among the groups. In the maxilla, 34 implants showed a mean marginal bone loss of 0.77 mm and a survival rate of 97.1%. In the mandible, 120 implants showed a mean marginal bone loss of 0.75 mm and a survival rate of 95.0%. The average marginal bone loss around all implants was $0.76{\pm}0.27mm$ at the last follow-up review after functional loading. The survival rate was 95.6% and success rate was 93.5%. CONCLUSION. In our study, single short implants less than 8 mm in length in the posterior areas had favorable clinical outcomes.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.34 no.1
• /
• pp.70-84
• /
• 1996

This paper reports marginal bone loss around osseointegrated implants after loading in partially edentulous patients in dental hospital, Yonsei University. Two types of implants($Br{\aa}nemark^{TM},\;IMZ^{TM}$) were used. Through the digital measurement on periapical radiograph around 37 implants in human subjects, marginal bone loss was observed for 24 months after delivery of prostheses. The results were as follows; 1. According to experimental periods marginal bone loss in total implants was 1.775 mm at 12 months, 1.921 mm at 24 months after delivery of prostheses(p<0.05). 2. Marginal bone loss in the $Br{\aa}nemark$ implants was 1.831 mm at 12 months, 1.833 mm at 24 months after delivery of prostheses(p<0.05). 3. Marginal bone loss in the IMZ implants was 1.578 mm at 12 months, 2.907 mm at 23 months after delivery of prostheses(p<0.05). 4. During the first year after loading, the IMZ implants showed less marginal bone loss than the $Br{\aa}nemark$ implants but, during the next the $Br{\aa}nemark$ implants showed less than the IMZ implants(p>0.05). These results indicate that marginal bone loss around osseointegrated implants occurs within the first 12 months after delivery of prostheses and stabilizes thereafter, so it is necessary to be careful of using dental implants for the first year after delivery of prostheses.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.33 no.3
• /
• pp.383-393
• /
• 2003

The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the amount of marginal bone loss between upper anterior area and upper posterior area with 71 upper single-tooth restorations on 2 stage machined $Br{{\aa}}nemark$ implants since Jan 1995. The second aim was to compare the bone defect group which had dehiscence and fenetration and the others in the upper anterior region. The results were as follows. 1. The most frequent reason of missing tooth in the upper anterior region was trauma by 61%. While upper posterior region showed various reasons such as congenital missing, advanced periodontitis, trauma. 2. Peri-implantitis with fistula occurred 1 of 41 implants in the upper anterior group in 1 year after loading and 2 of 32 implants in the upper posterior group failed before loading. The 1 year success rate of upper anterior group was 97.56 %, and 93.75 % for upper posterior group. 3. The mean marginal bone loss in the upper anterior group was 0.44${\pm}$0.25 mm, while 0.57${\pm}$0.32 mm in the upper posterior group. There was statistically significant difference in the amount of mean marginal bone loss (P${\pm}$0.10 mm at one year, and 0.48${\pm}$0.26 mm for the control group. No statistically significant difference of mean marginal bone loss was showen between bone defect group and the others at implantation. According to the results, the upper anterior region showed less marginal bone loss than the upper posterior region. In case of missing single upper tooth, careful consideration on recipient residual ridge to determine proper implant diameter and length, sufficient healing time, proper loading would lead to implant success. Single tooth implants in the maxilla seemed to be an alternative to fixed partial dentures without damage to adjacent teeth.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.42 no.6
• /
• pp.231-236
• /
• 2012

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of the crown-to-implant (C/I) ratio on the change in marginal bone level around the implant and to determine the site-related factors influencing the relationship between the C/I ratio and periimplant marginal bone loss. Methods: A total of 259 implants from 175 patients were evaluated at a mean follow-up of five years. Implants were divided into two groups according to their C/I ratios: ${\leq}$ 1, and >1. Site-related factors having an influence on the relationship between C/I ratio and periimplant marginal bone loss were analyzed according to the implant location, implant diameter, implant manufacturer, prosthesis type, and guided bone regeneration (GBR) procedure. Results: It was found that 1) implants with a C/I ratio below 1 exhibited greater periimplant marginal bone loss than implants with a C/I ratio more than 1, 2) site-related factors had an effect on periimplant marginal bone loss, except for the implant system used, 3) the C/I ratio was the factor having more dominant influence on periimplant marginal bone loss, compared with implant diameter, prosthesis type, implant location, and GBR procedure, 4) implants with a C/I ratio below 1 showed greater periimplant marginal bone loss than implants with a C/I ratio greater than 1 in the maxilla, but not in the mandible, 5) and periimplant marginal bone loss was more affected by the implant system than the C/I ratio. Conclusions: Within the limitations of this study, implants with a higher C/I ratio exhibited less marginal bone loss than implants with a lower C/I ratio in the posterior regions. The C/I ratio was a more dominant factor affecting periimplant marginal bone loss in the maxilla than the mandible. Meanwhile, the implant system was a more dominant factor influencing periimplant marginal bone loss than the C/I ratio.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.46 no.1
• /
• pp.53-64
• /
• 2008

Statement of problem: Peri-implant marginal bone loss is an important factor that affects the success of implants in esthetics and function. Various efforts have been made to reduce this bone loss by improving implant design and surface texture. Previous studies have shown that early marginal bone loss is affected by implant neck designs. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the influence of laser microtexturing of implant collar on peri-implant marginal bone loss. Materials and methods: Radiographical marginal bone loss was examined in patients treated with implant-supported fixed partial dentures. Marginal bone level was examined with 101 implant fixtures installed in 53 patients at three periods(at the time of implantation, prosthetic treatment and 6-month after loading). Four types of implants were examined. The differences of bone loss between implants(ITI standard) with enough biologic width and implants(ITI esthetic plus, Silhouette IC, Silhouette IC Laser-$Lok^{TM}$) with insufficient biologic width have been compared. Resorption angles were examined at the time of prosthetic delivery and 6-month after loading. Results and Conclusion: Within the limitation of this study, the following results were drawn. 1. The marginal bone loss of ITI standard and Silhouette IC Laser-$Lok^{TM}$ was less than that of ITI esthetic plus and Silhouette IC(P<0.05). The marginal bone loss between ITI standard and Silhouette IC Laser-$Lok^{TM}$ had no significant statistical difference(P>0.05). There was no significant statistical difference between marginal bone loss of ITI esthetic plus and Silhouette IC(P>0.05). 2. There was no significant difference in marginal bone loss between maxilla and mandible(P>0.05). 3. There was no significant difference in resorption angle among four types of implants(P>0.05). The marginal bone of implants with supracrestal collar design of less than that of biologic width had resorbed more than those with sufficient collar length. The roughness and laser microtexturing of implant neck seem to affect these results. If an implant with collar length of biologic width, exposure of fixture is a possible complication especially in the anterior regions of dentition that demand high esthetics. Short smooth neck implant are often recommended in these areas which may lack the distance between microgap and the marginal bone level. In these cases, the preservation of marginal bone must be put into consideration. From the result of this study, it may be concluded that laser microtexturing of implant neck is helpful in the preservation of marginal bone.

• 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 Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.28 no.1
• /
• pp.1-13
• /
• 2012

Short implants are used in parts which have anatomical structures like maxillary sinus, inferior alveolar nerve and limited alveolar height due to severe alveolar bone resorption. In these case, there are no need of additional bone augmentation so there are advantages like reduced entire treatment time, reduced patient's discomfort and protection of important anatomical structures. The aim of this study is, in implants whose length is less than 10mm, to analyze the impact of implant length, diameter, location of implant placement, presence of bone graft, presence of prosthesis splinting on survival rates and marginal bone resorption. The samples used in this study were 227 implants, less than 10mm, placed in 137 patients in Wonkwang university dental hospital implant center. From dental charts the information about implant length, diameter, location of implant placement, presence of bone graft, presence of prosthesis splinting were obtained. Emago advanced v5.6(Oral diagnostic systems, Amsterdam, The Netherlands)program was used to measure the amount of marginal bone resorption. Out of total 227 implants, resulting in 96.5 % of survival rate. There was a tendency toward higher failure rates for the maxilla and bone graft site. No significant difference in marginal bone resorption was found associated with length of implants(p>0.05) and neither with the diameter of implants. Among the risk factors examined, more failure rates of short implants can be attributed to poor bone quality in the maxilla and presence of bone graft. At implants under 10mm, length, diameter, location of implant placement, bone graft and splinting of prosthesis didn't affect marginal bone loss.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.29 no.2
• /
• pp.175-182
• /
• 2013

The purpose of this study was to observe and analyze the initial marginal bone resorption changes according to the patterns of cover screw exposures during healing period followed by implants installation. Total 64 fixtures(TiUniteTM, NobelBiocare, Sweden) were installed in partially edentulous jaws of 28 patients, who were selected retrospectively and were shown at least one cover screw exposure. Cover screw exposures were defined at 1 month recall. According to the patterns of exposures, groups were categorized into group 1 (No exposure), group 2 (pin-point exposure), group 3 (less than 1/2 of cover screw), group 4 (more than 1/2 of cover screw), group 5 (total exposure). Periapical radiographs were taken in purpose of changes of marginal bone level between installation and 2 month recall. Healing abutments were secured on the exposure groups at 2 month recall. Results were as follows: 1. Marginal bone resorptions were identified whenever cover screws were exposed. 2. Group 2 and 3 were shown significantly increased bone loss more than other group (P <.05). 3. Group 4 and 5 were shown significantly increased bone loss more than group 1, however, less than other groups ( P <.05). Conclusionally, cover screw exposure may cause marginal bone resorptions, therefore, early connection of healing abutment is clinically helpful.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.54 no.2
• /
• pp.103-109
• /
• 2016

Purpose: This study is to evaluate the clinical significance of implantation with simultaneous bone graft by comparing the marginal bone loss around maxillary anterior implants with or without bone graft. Materials and methods: Patients treated with implant-retained restorations on maxillary anterior region at Implant Center, Dental Hospital, Wonkwang University between June 2011 and May 2014 were included in this study. Date of implant placement, implant diameter, implant length, implant-abutment connection type and whether the bone graft was done were investigated. The patient's periapical radiographs taken immediately after implantation and at the most recent visit were compared. Marginal bone loss was measured using Emago advanced v5.6 program (Oral diagnostic systems, Amsterdam, Netherlands). Statistical analysis was done in independent t-test by using SPSS 22.0 program. Results: As a result of observing on 83 implants (without bone graft: 44, with bone graft: 39) of 52 patients for 6 - 45 months (average: 18.4 months), implants without bone graft showed $1.42{\pm}0.42mm$, implants with bone graft showed $1.28{\pm}0.45mm$ of marginal bone loss. Conclusion: In limitations of this study, implants with simultaneous bone graft had significantly less marginal bone loss than implants without bone graft.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.42 no.4
• /
• pp.458-470
• /
• 2004

Statement of problem: Br${\aa}$nemark or ITI are two currently most widely used implant systems but with contrasting design, surgical and restoration methods. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare changes and its statistical significance in bone height and shape which may rise due to the differences between two implant systems. Also to analyse the effect of inter-implant distance on annual bone height changes. Material & Method: Those patients who were treated with two or more of either Br${\aa}$nemark or ITI implants at posterior mandibular area at Yonsei University Dental Hospital, Implant Clinic were selected. At annual examination appointments, standardised radiographs using parallel technique were taken. Marginal bone and inter-implant crestal bone changes were measured and following results were obtained. Results: 1) When ITI and Br${\aa}$nemark system were compared, both annual marginal and inter-implant crestal bone height changes in ITI system in the first two years were smaller than Br${\aa}$nemark and they were statistically significant. On the third year, however, there was no statistical difference between two implant systems on their annual bone level changes (p>0.05). 2) The Marginal and inter-implant crestal bone changes were compared when inter-implant distance was less than 4mm. Statistically significant bone level changes were noted on the first year only for ITI implants but in the first and second year for Br${\aa}$nemark implants (p>0.05). 3) When comparing angulation changes between marginal bone and implant fixture, ITI system had smaller angulation changes but the annual changes were not statistically significant (p>0.05). Conclusion: Within the limitation of this study, it could be concluded that Br${\aa}$nemark implant systems had more changes in marginal and inter-implant crestal bone level in the first and second year after loading with statistical significance. Further studies are recommended to see the effects of these bone loss during the first and second year after loading on the long term prognosis of Br${\aa}$nemark Implants.