Influence of subcrestal implant placement or use of 2 mm healing abutment to stabilise crestal bone in thin tissue patient
| Author | Affiliation |
|---|---|
Linkevičius, Tomas | |
| Date |
|---|
2018-10-11 |
ISSN 1600-0501 (Electronic) 0905-7161 (Linking).
no. 12292
ground : It was proved that vertically thin soft thickness might be an important factor in development of early crestal bone loss, therefore several methods were advanced how to increase soft tissue thickness. Some authors claim, that subcrestal placement of implant and sub- sequent controlled bone remodelling can accommodate the problem. Another method suggests to increase soft tissue thickness by placing implant at the bone level with 2 mm height healing abutment and suture soft tissues over. Aim/Hypothesis : Aim of the study was fourfold- to register crestal bone loss in (i) 1.5 mm subcrestally placed implants, and (ii) epicrestally placed implants with 2 mm healing abutments, to (iii) register bone remodelling in subcrestal group, (iv) determine increase of soft tissues in epicrestal implants with 2 mm HA Material and Methods : Patients with vertically thin tissues of 2 mm or less received 24 submerged bone level platform- switched implants (Conelog, Camlog, Basel, Switzerland). Implants were divided into 2 equal groups – (i) 1.5 mm subcrestally placed implants and (ii) epicrestal implants with 2 mm healing abutments. At II stage surgery, all implants received 4 mm healing screws and later restored with Zr screw- retained single crowns, radiological images taken at II stage surgery and after 1 y follow- up. Bone loss was calculated as a distance between implant neck and first radiographically visible bone- to- implant contact and measured in both groups. Additionally, in subcrestal group bone remodelling was calculated as a distance between bone crest and implant neck. Mann- Whitney U- test was used for statistical analysis, significance set to 0.05. Results : After 1 y follow- up, 1 (subcrestal) group had 0.06 (0.07 SD) mm of bone loss, while 2 group (epicrestal with 2 mm healing abutment) had 0.11 (0.14 SD) mm of bone loss, with statistically significant difference ( P = 0.005). Bone remodelling in gro[...].