Warning: include(/home/quintpub/public_html/journals/prd/includes/code.php) [function.include]: failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/quintpub/public_html/journals/prd/abstract.php on line 2

Warning: include() [function.include]: Failed opening '/home/quintpub/public_html/journals/prd/includes/code.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php') in /home/quintpub/public_html/journals/prd/abstract.php on line 2
Comparison of Bone-Level and Tissue-Level Implants: A Pilot Study with a Histologic Analysis and a 4-Year Follow-up
Warning: include(/home/quintpub/public_html/journals/prdincludes/05_update/javascript.php) [function.include]: failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/quintpub/public_html/journals/prd/abstract.php on line 39

Warning: include() [function.include]: Failed opening '/home/quintpub/public_html/journals/prdincludes/05_update/javascript.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php') in /home/quintpub/public_html/journals/prd/abstract.php on line 39
Follow Us      

LOGIN

   Official Journal of The Academy of Osseointegration

 
Share Page:
Back

Volume 42 , Issue 4
July/August 2022

Pages 535–543


Comparison of Bone-Level and Tissue-Level Implants: A Pilot Study with a Histologic Analysis and a 4-Year Follow-up

Maria Menini, PhD, DDS/Elena Dellepiane, DDS, PhD/Talita Deiana, DDS/Ezio Fulcheri, MD/Paolo Pera, MD, DDS, PhD/Paolo Pesce, DDS, PhD


PMID: 35830320
DOI: 10.11607/prd.4990

This study clinically and histologically evaluated the performance of implants with different crestal morphologies: tissue-level implants and bone-level implants. Nine patients received at least two adjacent implants in an edentulous area: one bone-level implant (EO) and one tissue-level implant (TG) (total: 23 implants), placed beside each other using a single-stage delayed loading protocol. The implants were rehabilitated with screw-retained fixed partial dentures. Plaque Index (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), and peri-implant bone level were recorded at various postsurgical follow-ups, including 2 and 6 months as well as 1 and 4 years. At 3 months postsurgery, soft tissue biopsy samples were taken from all implant sites and histologically analyzed. Longitudinal assessment of the results (TG vs EO implants) was performed using a linear mixed model with random intercept and by using Spearman correlation or chi-square after visual inspection of the probability distribution. Student t test was used to compare means, and chi-square test was used for dichotomic variables. P < .05 was considered statistically significant. All implants were functional at 4 years. Peri-implant bone resorption was limited, with means of 1.20 ± 0.71 mm and 1.24 ± 0.82 mm for TG and EO implants, respectively. No significant differences in clinical parameters were identified between EO and TG implants. Histologic analysis revealed normal peri-implant soft tissue healing with poor inflammatory infiltrate. Differences in the histologic appearance of soft tissues were more related to patients than implant type. Both implants appeared to be suitable for partial rehabilitation of edentulous arches without differences in the investigated clinical and histologic parameters. However, TG implants showed a greater risk of implant collar exposure.


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.

 

© 2020 Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc

PRD Home
Current Issue
Ahead of Print
Archive
Author Guidelines
About
Submission Form
Submit
Reprints
Permission
Advertising
Quintessence Home
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
About Us
Contact Us
Help