The Influence of the Crown-implant Ratio on the Crestal Bone Level and Implant Secondary Stability - 36 Months Clinical Study
Trial Snapshot
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Status
- Completed
- Sponsor
- Enrollment
- 30
- Primary Endpoint
- Clinical measurement of implant stability
Study Overview
Brief Summary
The aim of the study was to determine whether implant length and the crown-to-implant (C/I) ratio influence implant stability and the loss of the surrounding marginal bone, and whether short implants can be used instead of sinus augmentation procedures.
Detailed Description
The patients participating in the study (n=30) had one single tooth implant - a short (OsseoSpeed™ L6Ø4 mm, Implants) or a regular implant (OsseoSpeed™ L11 and L13Ø4 mm, DENTSPLY Implants) - placed in the maxilla. The evaluation was based on clinical and radiological examination.
The crown-to-implant ratio was determined by dividing the length of the crown together with the abutment by the length of the implant placed crestally. Mean crown-to-implant ratios were calculated separately for each group and its correlation with the MBL (marginal bone loss) and stability was assessed. The authors compared the correlation between the C/I ratio values, MBL and secondary implant stability.
Study Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Allocation
- Randomized
- Intervention Model
- Parallel
- Primary Purpose
- Treatment
- Masking
- Single (Participant)
Eligibility Criteria
- Ages
- 18 Years to — (Adult, Older Adult)
- Sex
- All
- Accepts Healthy Volunteers
- Yes
Inclusion Criteria
- •Non-smoking patients with no systemic or local diseases were qualified.
- •Additional inclusion criteria were as follows:
- •minimal apicocoronal height of the alveolar ridge of 6 mm in the region of the implant insertion in the pre-surgical qualification
- •minimal width of the alveolar ridge of 6-7 mm in the region of interest
- •HKT (height of the keratinized tissue) higher than 2 mm
- •API ≤ 35 (Approximal Plaque Index)
- •(Plaque Index)
- •Bone Type III or D2 were included in the study
- •No graft procedures in the area of interest,
Exclusion Criteria
- Not provided
Arms & Interventions
Short implants Treatment
Group 2 (G2; n=15 patients) had short implants (OsseoSpeed ™ L6mm Ø4 mm) [DENTSPLY Implants, Waltham, MA, USA] placed without sinus lift and augmentation procedure.
Intervention: Short implants Treatment (Other)
Regular Implants Treatment
Group 1 (G1; n=15 patients) had conventional dental implants (OsseoSpeed ™ L11 Ø4 mm and L13 Ø4 mm) [DENTSPLY Implants, Waltham, MA, USA] placed, preceded by the sinus lift procedure from a lateral window approach with the application of the xenogeneic bone graft Geistlich Bio-Oss® [Geistlich AG, Wolhusen, Switzerland]. The lateral window approach sinus lift surgery was performed 6 weeks prior to the implant placement by the same surgeon.
Intervention: Regular implants Treatment (Other)
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Clinical measurement of implant stability
Time Frame: 36 months
Evaluation of implant secondary stability in both groups. Stability measured and evaluated with Periotest(R) device - after 36 months.
Secondary Outcomes
- Radiological measurement of marginal bone loss around implant(36 months)
Investigators
Jakub Hadzik
PhD, DDS
Akademicka Poliklinika Stomatologiczna