Fate of the buccal bone at implants placed early, delayed, or late after tooth extraction analyzed by cone beam CT : 10-year results from a randomized, controlled, clinical study

DSpace Repository

Fate of the buccal bone at implants placed early, delayed, or late after tooth extraction analyzed by cone beam CT : 10-year results from a randomized, controlled, clinical study

Show full item record

Files for download

Find Full text There are no files associated with this item.

Facebook

Simple item record

Publication Article, peer reviewed scientific
Title Fate of the buccal bone at implants placed early, delayed, or late after tooth extraction analyzed by cone beam CT : 10-year results from a randomized, controlled, clinical study
Author(s) Schropp, Lars ; Wenzel, Ann ; Spin-Neto, Rubens ; Stavropoulos, Andreas
Date 2014
English abstract
AIM:To present 10-year cone beam CT (CBCT) data on the fate of buccal bone at single-tooth implants placed early, delayed, or late after tooth extraction. MATERIAL AND METHODS:Sixty-three of 72 patients, originally randomly allocated to three equal-size groups, received a single-tooth implant on average 10 days (Ea; N = 22), 3 months (De; N = 22), or 1.5 years (La; N = 19) after tooth extraction. Healing abutments were mounted after a 3-month period of submerged healing and metalceramic crowns were cemented after one additional month. At the second stage surgery, presence of buccal bone defects (dehiscences or intrabony) and their dimensions were registered. CBCT scans recorded with a Scanora(®) 3D unit and standardized periapical (PA) radiographs of the implants were obtained at the 10-year control. Interproximal bone levels (i.e., the distance from the implant platform to the first bone-to-implant contact; BIC) measured in CBCT image sections and PA were compared, and the buccal bone level was determined in the CBCT images. RESULTS:Two Ea and one De implants failed to osseointegrate. Forty-nine patients attended the 10-year control and due to poor quality of 5 CBCT scans, useful CBCT images were available from 44 patients (Ea:12, De:17, La:15). No significant differences between CBCT and PA images in measurements of the interproximal bone levels were observed. Ten years after implant placement, BIC at the buccal aspect was located on average 2 mm apically to the implant platform (2.39 ± 1.06 mm [median = 2.36] for Ea, 2.22 ± 0.99 mm [median = 2.16] for De, and 1.85 ± 0.65 mm [median = 1.95] for La implants) with no significant difference among the groups (P = 0.20). Mean buccal bone level (bBL) for implants with an intrabony or a dehiscence defect at second stage surgery was 2.51 ± 1.12 mm [median = 2.70] and 2.84 ± 0.70 mm [median = 2.79], respectively, while 1.78 ± 0.74 mm [median = 1.93] for the implants with no defect. The difference in bBL between the implants without a defect and those with a dehiscence was significant at 10 years (P = 0.0005). CONCLUSION:Time of placement of single-tooth implants after tooth extraction did not significantly influence the peri-implant buccal bone level, while presence of a buccal bone dehiscence at second stage surgery resulted in significantly more apically located BIC buccally at 10 years.
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.12424 (link to publisher's fulltext)
Publisher Wiley
Host/Issue Clinical Oral Implants Research;
ISSN 1600-0501
Pages E-pub ahead of print
Language eng (iso)
Subject(s) buccal bone
cone beam CT
delayed implantation
dental implant
early implantation
late implantation
randomized controlled trial
single-tooth
Medicine
Research Subject Categories::ODONTOLOGY
Handle http://hdl.handle.net/2043/17634 (link to this page)

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show full item record

Search


Browse

My Account

Statistics