LOGIN
 
Share Page:
Back

Volume 21 , Issue 5
September/October 2006

Pages 777-784


Multiple Single-Tooth Implant Restorations in the Posterior Jaws: Maintenance of Marginal Bone Levels with Reference to the Implant-Abutment Microgap

Michael R. Norton, BDS


PMID: 17066640

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to measure marginal bone loss from the implant-abutment microgap to the bone crest between multiple freestanding implants functionally loaded for up to 7.5 years in the posterior jaws. Materials and Methods: Patients consecutively treated for the replacement of missing posterior teeth were included in the study. Using the implant-abutment interface, which was placed level with the crestal bone as a reference point, standardized follow-up radiographs were obtained to evaluate marginal bone loss. Results were subject to statistical analysis using the Wilcoxon rank sum test and the Wilcoxon signed rank test at the 95% confidence level. Additionally, soft tissue and prosthetic complications were recorded. Results: One hundred seventy-three implants in 54 patients were evaluated. Implants were in function for a mean of 37 months (range, 21 to 91 months). One implant failed, for a survival rate of 99.4%. Overall mean marginal bone loss was 0.65 mm (range, 0.0 to 4.8 mm). For the 80 maxillary and 93 mandibular implants, mean marginal bone loss was 0.56 mm and 0.70 mm, respectively. The frequency of bone loss 1.0 mm was 25.0% in the maxilla and 36.0% in the mandible; 23.1% of maxillary implants and 16.7% of mandibular implants demonstrated no bone loss. No significant differences were observed between men and women or between smokers and nonsmokers. The difference between mesial and distal bone levels was statistically significant (P < .001), with respective means of 0.53 mm and 0.76 mm. Recorded prosthetic complications included cementation failure (17.7%), porcelain fracture (7.2%), and abutment screw loosening (2.2%). Conclusions: Multiple single-tooth implants placed in the posterior jaws perform extremely well. Furthermore, it is possible to retain bone close to the implant-abutment microgap with certain implant designs. (Case Series) Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006;21:777C784


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.

 

© 2014 Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc JOMI Home
Current Issue
Ahead of Print
Archive
Author Guidelines
About
Accepted Manuscripts
Submission Form
Submit
Reprints
Permission
Advertising
Quintessence Home
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
About Us
Contact Us
Help