Evaluation of proximal bone loss around 2 commercial brands of SLA-surfaced implants and investigating possible effective factors
AbstractIntroduction: The long term clinical success of dental implants depends on the stability of crestal bone level. Different dental implantation systems focus on micro-and macro-design to reduce late bone resorption. The purpose of this study was to evaluate bone loss at the proximal (mesial and distal) surfaces of SLA implants from 2 different companies. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cross-sectional study was done on 48 patients receiving 161 SLA-surfaced (Straumann and Dentium) dental implants. The marginal bone loss was measured at mesial & distal sides of the implants on peri-apical X-ray images. The effective factors considered in this study were patients age, implant brand, time passed from fixture placement, preprosthetic surgery and type of prosthetic treatment that were obtained from patient records & interviews.Results: Average mesial and distal bone loss was 1.50±1.359 and 1.517±1.3465 respectively. Pearson correlation coefficient indicates that 1) time passed from fixture placement, 2) commercial brand, 3) history of pre-prosthetic surgery and 4) age affected the amount of bone loss. Conclusion: SLA-surfaced dental implants showed an acceptable amount of bone resorption and no statistically significant difference was observed between commercial brands. Keywords: Bone loss; Dental implants; Osseointegration.
2. Tricio J, Laohapand P, van Steenberghe D, Quirynen M, Naert I. Mechanical state assessment of the implant-bone continuum: A better understanding of the Periotest method. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1995;10:43–9.
3. Daubert DM, Weinstein BF, Bordin S, Leroux BG, Flemming TF. Prevalence and predictive factors for peri-implant disease and implant failure: a cross-sectional analysis. J Periodontol. 2015 Mar;86(3):337-47. J Periodontol. 2015;86(3):337-47.
4. Borie E, Orsi IA, de Araujo CP. The influence of the connection, length and diameter of an implant on bone biomechanics. Acta Odontol Scand. 2015;73:321–9.
5. Wyatt CC, Zarb GA. Bone level changes proximal to oral implants supporting fixed partial prostheses. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2002;13:162-8.
6. Zechner W, Trinkl N, Watzak G, Busenlechner D, Tepper G, Haas R, Watzek G. Radiologic follow-up of peri-implant bone loss around machine-surfaced and rough-surfaced interforaminal implants in the mandible functionally loaded for 3 to 7 years. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19:216-21.
7.Herrmann I, Lekholm U, Holm S, Kultje C. Evaluation of patient and implant characteristics as potential prognostic factors for oral implant failures. The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants. 2004;20(2):220-30.
8. Buser D, Mericske-Stern R, Bernard JP, Behneke A, Behneke N, Hirt HP, Belser UC, Lang NP. Long-term evaluation of nonsubmerged. ITI implants. Part 1: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multi-center study with 2359 implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 1997;8:161-172.
9. Abrahamsson I, Berglundh T, Lindhe J. The mucosal barrier following abutment dis/reconnection. An experimental study in dogs. J Clin Periodontol 1997;24:568–572.
10. Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Brånemark P-I. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. International journal of oral surgery. 1981;10(6):387-416.
11. Zarb G, Schmitt A. The longitudinal clinical effectiveness of osseointegrated dental implants: the Toronto study. Part I: surgical results. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry. 1990;63(4):451-7.
12. De Bruyn H, Vandeweghe S, Ruyffelaert C, Cosyn J, Sennerby L. Radiographic evaluation of modern oral implants with emphasis on crestal bone level and relevance to peri-implant health. Periodontol 2000 2013: 62: 256–270.
13. Elkhaweldi A, Lee DH, Wang W, Cho SC. The Survival Rate of RBM Surface versus SLA Surface in Geometrically Identical Implant Design. J Oral Bio. 2014;1(1): 8.
14 Buser D, Janner SF, Wittneben JG, Br€agger U, Ramseier CA,Salvi GE. 10-year survival and success rates of 511 titanium implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface: a retrospective study in 303 partially edentulous patients. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2012: 14: 839–851.
15. Van Velzen FJ, Ofec R, Schulten EA, Ten Bruggenkate CM. 10-year survival rate and the incidence of peri-implant disease of 374 titanium dental implants with a SLA surface: a prospective cohort study in 177 fully and partially edentulous patients. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26(10):1121-8.
16. Roccuzzo, M., Bonino, L., Dalmasso, P. & Aglietta, M. (2013) Long-term results of a three arms prospective cohort study on implants in periodontally compromised patients: 10-year data around sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) surface. Clinical Oral Implants Research 25, 1105–111.
17. Rismanchian M, Birang R. The clinical effectiveness of screw type Implant “Nisastan system” in the posterior region of the mandible: A 2 year prospective study. Journal of Islamic Dental Association of Iran. 2007;19(2):62-7.
18. Albrektsson T, Zarb G, Worthington P, Eriksson A. The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1986;1(1):11-25.
19. Ellegaard B, Baelum V, Karring T. Implant therapy in periodontally compromised patients. Clin Oral Implants Res 1997;8: 180–188.
20. Fourmosis L, Bragger U. Radiographic interpretation of peri-implant structures. In: Lang NP, Karring T, Lindhe J (eds). Proceedings of the 3rd European Workshop on Periodontology. Chicago: Quintessence, 1999:228–236.
21. Eckert SE, Choi YG, Sanchez AR, Koka S. Comparison of dental implant systems: Quality of clinical evidence and prediction of 5-year survival. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2005;20:406–415.
22.Geckili O, Mumcu E, Bilhan H. Radiographic Evaluation of Narrow-Diameter Implants After 5 Years of Clinical Function: A Retrospective Study. Journal of Oral Implantology. 2013;39(s1):273-9.
23. Laurell L, Lundgren D. Marginal Bone Level Changes at Dental Implants after 5 Years in Function: A Meta‐Analysis. Clinical implant dentistry and related research. 2011;13(1):19-28.
24. Jimbo R, Albrektsson T. Long-term clinical success of minimally and moderately rough oral implants: a review of 71 studies with 5 years or more of follow-up. Implant Dentistry 2015: 24: 62–69.
25. Strietzel FP, Reichart PA, Kale A, Kulkarni M, Wegner B, Küchler I. Smoking interferes with the prognosis of dental implant treatment: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Journal of clinical periodontology. 2007;34(6):523-44.
26. Graziani F, Donos N, Needleman I, Gabriele M, Tonetti M. Comparison of implant survival following sinus floor augmentation procedures with implants placed in pristine posterior maxillary bone: a systematic review. Clinical Oral Implants Research. 2004;15(6):677-82.
27. Anitua E, Orive G, Aguirre JJ, Ardanza B, Andía I. 5‐year clinical experience with BTI® dental implants: risk factors for implant failure. Journal of clinical periodontology. 2008;35(8):724-32.
28. Susarla SM, Chuang S-K, Dodson TB. Delayed versus immediate loading of implants: survival analysis and risk factors for dental implant failure. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 2008;66(2):251-5.
29. Moy PK, Medina D, Shetty V, Aghaloo TL. Dental implant failure rates and associated risk factors. The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants. 2004;20(4):569-77.
30. McDermott NE, Chuang S, Woo VV, Dodson TB. Maxillary sinus augmentation as a risk factor for implant failure. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants. 2006;21(3):366.
31. Kinsel RP, Liss M. Retrospective analysis of 56 edentulous dental arches restored with 344 single-stage implants using an immediate loading fixed provisional protocol: statistical predictors of implant failure. The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants. 2006;22(5):823-30.
32. Kourtis SG, Sotiriadou S, Voliotis S, Challas A. Private practice results of dental implants. Part I: survival and evaluation of risk factors—Part II: surgical and prosthetic complications. Implant dentistry. 2004;13(4):373-85.
33. Tabrizi R, Pourdanesh F, Zare S, Daneste H, Zeini N. Do angulated implants increase the amount of bone loss around implants in the anterior maxilla? Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 2013;71(2):272-7.
34. Norton MR. Marginal bone levels at single tooth implants with a conical fixture design. The influence of surface macro- and microstructure. Clin Oral Implants Res 1998;9:91-99
35. Porter JA, von Fraunhofer JA. Success or failure of dental implants? A literature review with treatment considerations. General dentistry. 2004;53(6):423-32; quiz 33, 46.
36. De Souza J, Neto A, Dalago H, de Souza JJ, Bianchini M. Impact of local and systemic factors on additional peri-implant bone loss. Quintessence international (Berlin, Germany: 1985). 2013;44(5):415-24.
Copyright (c) 2020 Journal of Craniomaxillofacial Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.