13
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Implant stability measurement of delayed and immediately loaded implants during healing.

      Clinical Oral Implants Research
      Acid Etching, Dental, Air Abrasion, Dental, Bone Density, physiology, Dental Abutments, Dental Implants, Dental Prosthesis Design, Dental Prosthesis Retention, Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported, Dental Restoration Failure, Denture, Partial, Fixed, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Mandible, physiopathology, surgery, Maxilla, Middle Aged, Osseointegration, Statistics, Nonparametric, Survival Analysis, Treatment Outcome, Vibration, Wound Healing

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The purpose of the present study was (1) to measure the primary stability of ITI implants placed in both jaws and determine the factors that affect the implant stability quotient (ISQ) determined by the resonance frequency method and (2) to monitor implant stability during the first 3 months of healing and evaluate any difference between immediately loaded (IL) implants and standard delayed loaded (DL) implants. The IL and DL groups consisted of 18 patients/63 implants and 18 patients/43 implants. IL implants were loaded after 2 days; DL implants were left to heal according to the one-stage procedure. The ISQ was recorded with an Osstell apparatus (Integration Diagnostics AB, Gothenburg, Sweden) at implant placement, after 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 weeks. Primary stability was affected by the jaw and the bone type. The ISQ was higher in the mandible (59.8+/-6.7) than the maxilla (55.0+/-6.8). The ISQ was significantly higher in type I bone (62.8+/-7.2) than in type III bone (56.0+/-7.8). The implant position, implant length, implant diameter and implant deepening (esthetic plus implants) did not affect primary stability. After 3 months, the gain in stability was higher in the mandible than in the maxilla. The influence of bone type was leveled off and bone quality did not affect implant stability. The resonance-frequency analysis method did not reveal any difference in implant stability between the IL and DL implants over the healing period. Implant stability remained constant or increased slightly during the first 4-6 weeks and then increased more markedly. One DL and IL implant failed; both were 8 mm long placed in type III bone. At the 1-year control, the survival rate of the IL and the DL implants was 98.4% and 97.7%, respectively. This study showed no difference in implant stability between the IL and DL procedures over the first 3 months. IL short-span bridges placed in the posterior region and full arch rehabilitation of the maxilla with ITI sandblasted-and-etched implants were highly predictable.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Comments

          Comment on this article