Discussion: A clinical and radiographic study of implants (2)
The combination of the NobelParallel CC implant launched in 2015 and an abutment with ASC is relatively new and has so far been lined to only few mechanical problems [39, 40], among which rotation of the crown when torqueing the abutment screw was not stated. In both patients, a new implant was placed without any need for additional bone augmentation and without further complications. Apart from these biological and mechanical problems, no additional complications were registered.
Assessment of PD and BOP revealed that most implants were characterised by healthy peri-implant tissues. The mean PD at implant level was 2.19 mm in the PRF group and 2.13 mm in the control group. Similar findings of long-term clinical outcomes of implants placed in an autogenous bone block [12] and native bone have previously been published [41]. All implants were positioned approximately 2.5 mm apically from the buccal gingival margin, which in some patients resulted in placement of the implant top apically to the marginal bone level (Table 2, Fig. 2). At the final follow-up, both groups demonstrated favourable peri-implant marginal bone levels, although the PRF group revealed a 0.43 mm (p = 0.03) higher peri-implant marginal bone level than the control group, meaning that the bone level was higher around the implant for the test group. This difference may be caused by a higher number of incisor implants in the control group (Table 1), since a more pronounced bone resorption rate in the anterior region compared to the posterior region following bone block augmentation has previously been described [26]. One patient in the PRF group demonstrated bone resorption around the implant at the abutment operation of more than 1 mm, but the marginal peri-implant bone level of that implant was stable both when the impression was taken and at the final follow-up. In contrast, one patient in the control group demonstrated a stable peri-implant marginal bone level both at the abutment operation and when the impression was taken, but showed a peri-implant marginal bone loss of more than 2 mm at the final follow-up. Consequently, the long-term prognosis of this implant may be compromised. The histological evaluation [27] of the biopsies retrieved at implant placement of this patient sample has previously been described. The above-mentioned patients were the only two patients (2/25 patient) in which their bone biopsy was characterized by moderate to heavy inflammation, indicating that the bone resorption and thereby the peri-implant marginal bone level are associated with resolution of the inflammatory process [42]. For both groups, the peri-implant marginal bone level of the implants was comparable to levels reported in previous studies involving implant placement in non-augmented and augmented sites [12, 13, 39].
Serial posts:
- A clinical and radiographic study of implants placed in autogenous bone grafts
- Background: A clinical and radiographic study of implants (1)
- Background: A clinical and radiographic study of implants (2)
- Material & methods: A clinical and radiographic study of implants (1)
- Material & methods: A clinical and radiographic study of implants (2)
- Material & methods: A clinical and radiographic study of implants (3)
- Material & methods: A clinical and radiographic study of implants (4)
- Material & methods: A clinical and radiographic study of implants (5)
- Material & methods: A clinical and radiographic study of implants (6)
- Results: A clinical and radiographic study of implants (1)
- Results: A clinical and radiographic study of implants (2)
- Results: A clinical and radiographic study of implants (3)
- Results: A clinical and radiographic study of implants (4)
- Discussion: A clinical and radiographic study of implants (1)
- Discussion: A clinical and radiographic study of implants (2)
- Discussion: A clinical and radiographic study of implants (3)
- Abbreviations & References: A clinical and radiographic study of implants
- Table 1 Demographics and survival rates of implants and implant crowns
- Table 2 Radiographic peri-implant marginal bone level in mm
- Table 3 Radiographic marginal bone level and clinical recession on neighbouring tooth surface
- Table 4 Patient-related outcome measures at baseline and at the final follow-up
- Figure 1. Intraoperative photos illustrating bone harvesting
- Figure 2. Box plot of the radiographic peri-implant marginal bone level
- Figure 3. Data from the VAS of patient-related outcome measures at the time of mounting of the implant-supported crown and at the final follow-up of the PRF and control group