İmplant üstü kron restorasyonlarda marjinal kemik kaybının incelenmesi

Kerem Kılıc; Banuçiçek Kandemir; Halil Kılınc; Bulent Kesim

doi:10.7126/cdj.2013.1785

EN TR

-

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study is, toinvestigate the effects of crown length-implantlength ratios, implant diameters implant types andfollow-up periods of patients on the marginal boneloss in the implant-supported restorations.Materials and Methods: The lengths of dentalimplants were measured on the orthopantographsthat were taken after implantation and afterrestoration at the follow-up of 61 implant-supportedrestoration restorated in Erciyes University Facultyof Dentistry. The magnification ratio of radiographswas calculated with the measured lengths ofimplants and the real lengths of implants. Then,averages of mesial and distal marginal bone levelswere measured with reference to the implant neck.The differences between the marginal bone levels(magnification ratios were taken into account) thatwere measured from first and secondorthopantographs were noted. Finally, the effects ofcrown length-implant length ratio, implantdiameter, implant type and follow-up periods on themarginal bone loss were evaluated.Results: The effects of diameter of implant,type of implant and follow-up period of implantsupported restorations on the marginal bone losswere not statistically significant (p>0.05). Theimplants that have crown length-implant lengthratio above 1 showed more marginal bone loss thanthe implants that have crown length-implant lengthratio below 0.5. And this difference was statisticallysignificant (p=0.006). Marginal bone loss values ofall subgroups were within clinically acceptablelimits.Conclusion: As a result of this study, ratio ofcrown length-implant length, implant diameter,implant type and follow-up periods of implantsupported restoration cause bone loss withinacceptable limits.

Keywords

Marginal bone resorption, implantlength, implant diameter, implant type.

İmplant üstü kron restorasyonlarda marjinal kemik kaybının incelenmesi

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, implant üstü kron restorasyonlarında kron boyu-implant boyu oranlarının, implant çaplarının, implant tiplerinin ve implant kullanım sürelerinin marjinal kemik kaybı üzerine etkilerinin incelenmesidir. Gereç ve Yöntem: Erciyes Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi’nde yapılan 61 implant üstü kron restorasyonundan, implantlar yerleştirildikten hemen sonra ve restorasyonlar tamamlandıktan sonra kontrol randevularında alınan iki panoramik röntgen üzerinde, resim düzenleme yazılımı kullanılarak dental implantların boyu ölçüldü. Radyograflar üzerinde tespit edilen implant boyu, implantın gerçek boyuna oranlanarak panoramik radyografın magnifikasyon miktarı hesaplandı. Daha sonra, implantın boynu referans alınarak mezial ve distal noktalardan ölçülen marjinal kemik seviyelerinin ortalamaları alındı. Her iki panoramik radyograftan elde edilen marjinal kemik seviyeleri arası fark (magnifikasyon oranı da hesap edilerek) not edildi. Sonuç olarak, kron boyu-implant boyu oranı, implant çapı, implant tipi ve implant kullanım sürelerinin marjinal kemik kaybına etkisi değerlendirildi. Bulgular: İmplant çapının, implant tipinin ve takip süresinin marjinal kemik kaybına etkisi istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bulunmamıştır (p > 0,05). Kron boyu-implant boyu oranı 0,5’in altında olan grupla 1’in üzerinde olan grup arasında marjinal kemik kaybı bakımından anlamlı farklılık bulunmuştur (p=0,006). Tüm alt gruplar için elde edilen kemik kaybı değerleri klinik olarak kabul edilebilir sınırlar içerisindedir. Sonuç: Çalışmamızın sonucunda, kron boyuimplant boyu, implant çapı, implant tipi ve takip süresinin implant üstü kron restorasyonlarının marjinal kemik seviyesinde kabul edilebilir sınırlarda kemik kaybına sebep olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır

Anahtar Kelimeler

Marjinal kemik rezorpsiyonu, implant boyu, implant çapı, implant tipi

References

Lopez-Maril, Calvo-Guirado JL, Martin-Castellote B, Gomez-Moreno G, Lopez-Mari M. Implant platform switching concept: an updated review. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2009;14:450-454.
Esposito M, Hiersch J-M, Lekholm U, Thomsen P. Biological factors contributing to failures of osseointegrated oral implants (I). Success criteria and epidemiology. Eur J Oral Sci 1998;106:527–551.
Levent H. Fonksiyonel ve Parafonksiyonel Kuvvetlerin İmplantlara Etkisi. AnkaraÜniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Protetik Diş Tedavisi A.D. Doktora Tezi, Ankara, 1997.
Iplikcioglu H, Akca K. Comparative evaluation of the effect of diameter, length and number of implants supporting three-unit fixed partial prostheses on stres distribution in the bone. J Dent 2002;30:41-46.
Lum LB, Osier JF. Load transfer from endosteal implants to supporting bone: an analysis using statics. Part one: Horizontal loading. J Oral Implantol 1992;18:343-348.
Weinberg LA, Kruger B. An evaluation of torque (moment) on implant/prosthesis with staggered buccal and lingual stres. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1996;16:252-265.
Misch, CE. Posterior single-tooth replacement. In: Dental implant prosthetics. Ed. Misch, C.E, Perel M.L. 1th ed. Elsevier Mosby. St Louis, p:360, 2005.
Misch, CE. Avaliable bone and implant dentistry. In: Dental implant prosthetics. Ed. Misch, C.E, Perel M.L. 1th ed. Elsevier Mosby. St Louis, p:107, 2005.

Adell R, Lecholm U, Rockler B, Branemark PI, Lindhe J, Eriksson B, et al. Marginal tissue reaction at osseointegrated titanium fixtures (I). A 3 year longitudinal prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1986;15:39-52.
Appleton RS, Nummikoski PV, Pigno MA, Cronin RJ, Chung K-H. A radiographic assesment of progressive loading on bone around single osseointegrated implants in the posterior maxilla. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005;16:161-167.
Arvidson K, Bystedt H, Frykholm A, von Konow L, Lothigius E. Five-year prospective follow-up report of the Astra Tech Dental Implant System in the treatment of edentulous mandibles. Clin Oral Implants Res 1998;9:225-234.
Astrand P, Engquist B, Dahlgren S, Kertsin E, Feldmann H. Astra Tech and Branemark system implants: a 5- year prospective study of marginal bone reactions. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004;15:413-420.
Bahat, O. Branemark system implants in the posterior jaw: clinical study of 660 implants followed for 5 to 12 years. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:646-653.
Kitamura E, Stegaroui R, Nomura S, Miyakawa O. Biomechanical aspects of marginal bone resorption around osseointegrated implants: considerations based on a three-dimensional finite element analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004;15:401-412.
Becker J, Ferrari D, Mihatovic I, Sahm N, Schaer A, Schwarz F. Stability of crestal bone level at platform-switched non-submerged titanium implants: a histomorphometrical study in dogs. J Clin Periodontol 2009;36:532-539.
Calvo Guirado JL, Ortiz Ruiz AJ, Gomez Moreno G, Lopez Mari L, Bravo Gonzalez LA. Immediate loading and immediate restoration in 105 expanded-platform implants via the Diem System after a 16-month follow-up period. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2008;13:576-581.
Canay S, Akça K. Biomechanical aspects of bone-level diameter shifting at implant-abutment interface. Implant Dent 2009;18:239-248.
Lazzara RJ, Porter SS. Platform switching: a new concept in implant dentistry for controlling postrestorative crestal bone levels. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2006;26:9-17.
Randow K, Ercisson I, Nilner K, Petersson A. Glantz PO. Immediate functional loading of Branemark dental implants An 18-month clinical follow-up study. Clin Oral Implants Res 1999;10:8-15.
Geckili O, Mumcu E, Bilhan HA. Radiographic evaluation of narrow diameter implants after 5 years of clinical function:retrospective study. J Oral Implantol 2011; Article in press.
Turkyilmaz I. One year clinical outcome of dental implants placed in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A case series. Implant Dent 2010;19:323-329.
Strietzel PF, Karmon B, Lorean A, Fischer PP. Implant prosthetic rehabilitation of the edentulous maxilla and mandible with immediately loaded implants: preliminary data from a retrospective study, considering time of implantation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2011;26:139-147.
Albrektsson T, Zarb G, Worthington P, Eriksson AR.The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1986;1:11–25.
Bragger U, Hafeli H., Huber B, Hammerle C.H.F., Lang,N.P. Evaluation of post- surgical crestal bone levels adjacent to non-sub- merged dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 1998;9:218–224.
Lekholm U, Gunne J, Henry P, Higuchi K, Linden U, Bergtröm C, et al. Survival of the Branemark implant in partially edentulous jaws: a 10 year prospective multicenter study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:639-45.
Friberg B, Ekestubbe A, Sennerby L. Clinical outcome of Branemark system implants of various diameters: a retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002;17:671-677.
Andersen E, Saxegaard E, Knutsen BM, Haanes HR. A prospective clinical study evaluating the safety and effectiveness of narrow-diameter threated implants in the anterior region of the maxilla. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001;16:217-224.
Zinsli B, Sagesser T, Mericske E, Meriscke-Stern R. Clinical evaluation of small-diameter ITI implants: a prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19:92-99.
Eskitaşcıoğlu G, Üşümez A, Sevimay E. The influence of occlusal loading location on stresses transfered to implant-supported prostheses and supporting bone: a three dimensional finite element study. J Prosthet Dent 2004;91:144-150.
Holmgren EP, Seckinger RJ, Kilgren LM, Mante F. Evaluating parameters of osseointegrated dental implants using finite element analysis-a two-dimensional comparative study examining the effect of implant diameter, implant shape, and load direction. J Oral Implantol 1998;24:80-88.
Sütpideler M, Eckert SE, Zobitz M. Finite element analysis of effect prosthesis height, angle of force application, and implant ofset on supporting bone. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19:819-825.
Akça K, İplikçioğlu H. Finite element analysis of the effect of short implant usage in place of cantilever extensions in mandibular posterior edentulism. J Oral Rehabil 2002;29:350-356.
Rangert BR, SullivanRM, Jemt TM. Load factor control for implants in the posterior partially edentul oussegment. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1997;12:360–370.
Tawil G, Aboujaoude N, Younan R. Influence of prosthetic parameters on the survival and complication rates of short implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006;21:275–282
Renouard F, Nisand D. Impact of length and diameter on survival rates. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006;17:35–51.
Kılıç E, Kılıç K, Er N, Yağan AE, Aral AC, Alkan A. Kısa Dental İmplantların Klinik ve Radyolojik Takibi: Retrospektif Çalışma. Cumhuriyet Dent J 2011;14:211-218
Schneider D, Witt L, Hammarle HC. Influence of the crown-to-implant length ratio on the clinical performance of implants supporting single crown restorations: a cross-sectional retrospective 5-year investigation. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23:169-174.
Malchiodi L, Cucchi A, Ghensi P, Consonni D, Nocini PF. Influence of crown-implant ratio on implant success rates and crestal bone levels: a 36-month follow-up prospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2013 Feb 12. doi: 10.1111/clr.12105. [Epub ahead of print].
Cappiello M, Luongo R, Di Iorio D, Bugea C, Cocchetto R, Celletti R. Evaluation of peri-implant bone loss around platform-switched implants. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2008;28:347–355.
Canullo L, Fedele GR, Iannello G, Jepsen S. Platform switching and marginal bone-level alterations: the results of a randomized-controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010;21:115-121.
Degidi M, Iezzi G, Scarano A, Piatelli A. Immediately loaded titanium implant with a tissue-stabilizing/maintaining design (beyond platform switch) retrieved from man after 4 weeks: a histological and histomorphometrical evaluation. A case report. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008;19:276-282.
Jung RE, Jones AA, Higginbottom FL, Wilson TG, Schoolfield J, Buser D, et al. The influence of nonmatching implant and abutment diameters on radiographic crestal bone levels in dogs. J Periodontol 2008;79:260-270.
Maeda Y, Miura J, Taki I, Sogo M. Biomechanical analysis on platform switching: is there any biomechanical rationale? Clin Oral Implants Res 2007;18:581-584.

Details

Primary Language

Turkish

Subjects

-

Journal Section

-

Authors

Kerem Kılıc

Banuçiçek Kandemir

Halil Kılınc

Bulent Kesim

Publication Date

July 26, 2013

Submission Date

October 11, 2012

Acceptance Date

-

Published in Issue

Year 2013 Volume: 16 Number: 3

DOI

https://doi.org/10.7126/cdj.2013.1785

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA76YU52ZL

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

EndNote

Kılıc K, Kandemir B, Kılınc H, Kesim B (July 1, 2013) İmplant üstü kron restorasyonlarda marjinal kemik kaybının incelenmesi. Cumhuriyet Dental Journal 16 3 188–196.

Cited By

Düşük Devirli İrrigasyonsuz Frezlemenin Dental İmplant Başarısına Etkisinin Değerlendirilmesi

Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi

https://doi.org/10.24998/maeusabed.950439