LOGIN
 
Share Page:
Back

Volume 25 , Issue 6
November/December 2010

Pages 11891194


Clinical Evaluation of Marginal Bone Level Change of Multiple Adjacent Implants Restored with Splinted and Nonsplinted Restorations: A 5-year Prospective Study

Paolo Vigolo, Dr Odont, MScD/Massimiliano Zaccaria, Dr Odont


PMID: 21197497

Purpose: The success of single-tooth implant restorations has resulted in an increased use of nonsplinted implants to replace adjacent missing teeth; however, this may result in excessive force transmission to the implant and bone, causing bone loss. The purpose of this prospective study was to compare the marginal bone level change of adjacent splinted implants and of nonsplinted implants functionally loaded with cemented restorations up to 5 years in maxillae. Material and Methods: Between 2002 and 2004, all patients who received three consecutive adjacent implants in a private office and a university implant dentistry department were included in this study. All implants were placed in posterior maxillae. Maxillary left implants were restored with splinted cemented restorations, and maxillary right implants were restored with nonsplinted cemented restorations. Marginal bone resorption was measured with intraoral radiographs annually for 5 years. The data were analyzed statistically with the Mann-Whitney U test and the two-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test to identify differences between splinted and nonsplinted implant restorations. Results: One hundred thirty-two implants were placed in 44 patients. Two subjects (6 implants in total) did not complete the study. Three implants failed at stage-two surgery. Of the remaining 123 implants, 63 were restored with splinted cemented restorations and 60 were restored with nonsplinted cemented restorations. The mean marginal bone level changes at the 5-year recall were 0.7 0.2 mm for splinted restorations and 0.8 0.2 mm) for nonsplinted restorations. Conclusions: Peri-implant marginal bone loss around nonsplinted implants in the present study was statistically equivalent to that observed in splinted implants. Multiple nonsplinted implants can be successfully included in many clinical situations in an effort to optimize esthetics and circumvent the problem of nonpassively fitting frameworks. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010;25:11891194

Key words: bone level changes, dental implants, implant crowns, implant-supported prostheses, splinting


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