LOGIN
 
Share Page:
Back

Volume 18 , Issue 3
May/June 2003

Pages 424432


Clinical and Radiologic Evaluation of 2-Stage IMZ Implants Placed in a Single-Stage Procedure: 2-year Results of a Prospective Comparative Study

Kees Heydenrijk, DDS, MA/Gerry M. Raghoebar, MD, DDS, PhD/Henny J. A. Meijer, DDS, PhD/Boudewijn Stegenga, DDS, PhD


PMID: 12814319

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of using a 2-stage implant system in a single-stage procedure and to study the impact of the microgap between the implant and the abutment. Materials and Methods: Sixty edentulous patients (Cawood class V or VI) participated in this study. After randomization, 20 patients received 2 IMZ implants placed in a single-stage procedure, 20 patients received 2 IMZ implants placed in the traditional 2-stage procedure, and 20 patients were treated with 2 ITI implants (single-stage procedure). The implants were placed in the canine area of the mandible. After 3 months, mandibular overdentures were fabricated, supported by a bar-and-clip attachment. A standardized clinical and radiographic evaluation was performed immediately after prosthesis placement and after 12 and 24 months. Results: One IMZ implant of the 1-stage group and 1 IMZ implant of the 2-stage group were lost after 6 and 12 months, respectively. Apart from several significant but clinically irrelevant differences, the 3 groups did not appear to differ markedly with regard to clinical parameters during the evaluation period. The mean bone loss within the first 2 years of functioning (1.1 mm IMZ 1-stage, 0.8 mm IMZ 2-stage, 1.2 mm ITI) was comparable for the 3 groups. Discussion and Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that dental implants designed for a submerged implantation procedure can also be used in a single-stage procedure and may be as predictable as when the same implants used in a 2-stage procedure or as 1-stage implants. Placement of the microgap at the crestal level in 2-stage implants did not appear to have an adverse effect on the amount of peri-implant bone loss at 2 years in this study population. (INT J ORAL MAXILLOFAC IMPLANTS 2003;18:424432)


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