Share Page:

Volume 18 , Issue 6
November/December 2003

Pages 856–864

Four-year Follow-up of Larger-Diameter Implants Placed in Fresh Extraction Sockets Using a Resorbable Membrane or a Resorbable Alloplastic Material

Loris Prosper, MD/Enrico F. Gherlone, MD, MS/Sara Redaelli, DDS/Manlio Quaranta, MD,MS

PMID: 14696661

Purpose: The aim of this randomized study was to evaluate and compare the long-term success rates of cylindric, screw-type titanium implants with a larger diameter (5.9 mm) that were placed in fresh extraction sockets in association with resorbable bone substitutes or a resorbable membrane. Materials and Methods: Eighty-three partially edentulous adult patients, selected from among those treated in 1997 and 1998 at the San Raffaele Institute in whom 1 or more implants had been placed into fresh posterior mandibular or maxillary sockets, were included in the study. A total of 111 implants were placed, 36 in mandibles and 75 in maxillae. Fifty-six implants were placed in combination with resorbable hydroxyapatite (HA group) and 55 with a resorbable membrane (MR group). Intraoral radiographs and follow-up examinations, including verification of implant stability via the Periotest, were carried out at secondstage surgery 3, 6, 9, and 12 months later; and then annually up to 4 years after placement of the definitive restoration. The radiographic examination was conducted by means of a standardized procedure to verify osseointegration. Results: There was 100% attendance at the follow-up examination after 4 years. At second-stage surgery, which was performed after 4 to 6 months’ healing time, none of the implants showed any signs of mobility, peri-implantitis, or bone loss. Two implants failed in the MR group, one at 3 months and one at 9 months after placement; 1 implant failed in the HA group at 4 months after placement. After 4 years, the implant success rate was 97.3% (108 of 111 implants were considered successful). The success rate did not differ significantly between the HA group (98.2%) and the MR group (96.4%). Discussion: The use of larger-diameter implants served to minimize the anatomic discrepancies that would have evolved when substituting a molar with a standard-diameter implant. According to the accepted criteria for success, the 5-year success rate should be at least 85%; therefore both methods may be considered satisfactory. Conclusion: Implants placed in combination with a resorbable allogeneic material or with a resorbable membrane provided predictable long-term results when restored with a fixed partial denture. INT J ORAL MAXILLOFAC IMPLANTS 2003;18:856–864

Full Text PDF File | Order Article


Get Adobe Reader
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF files. This is a free program available from the Adobe web site.
Follow the download directions on the Adobe web site to get your copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.


© 2015 Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc JOMI Home
Current Issue
Ahead of Print
Author Guidelines
Accepted Manuscripts
Submission Form
Quintessence Home
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
About Us
Contact Us